DOCSLIB.ORG

EUPT-CF10-Webinar

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Results of EUPT-CF10 Incurred and spiked pesticides in rye Mette Erecius Poulsen Holte, 20 September 2016 PTs on cereals/feed 2016 EUPT-CF10 Test material Rye flour Participants 178 (160) Compulsory target pesticides 134 Voluntary target pesticides 7 Incurred pesticides 10 Spiked pesticides 8 Total no. of pesticides 18 National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Advisory Group Quality Group Amadeo R. Fernández-Alba Antonio Valverde André de Kok Stewart Reynolds Antonio Valverde Magnus Jezussek Michelangelo Anastassiades Miguel Gamón Organising team at EURL Philippe Gros Mette Erecius Poulsen Ralf Lippold Susan Strange Herrmann Sonja Masselter Parvaneh Hajeb Stewart Reynolds Merete B. Ludwigsen Tuija Pihlström Lisbet Pilhkjær Finbarr Oregan Jens-Ole Frimann National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Activity Dates Announcement Calendar December 2015 Target Pesticide List EUPT-Registration Website 11 January 2016 Deadline for registration 1 February 2016 Release of Specific Protocol 29 February 2016 Distribution of Test items 7 March 2016 Deadline for Receipt and Acceptance of Test Materials within 24 hr on reciept 11 April 2016 Deadline for Result Submission at 13.00 CET Deadline for submission of additional method information for 15 April 2015 false negative results Preliminary Report (only compilation of results) 30 May 2015 Final Report December 2015 National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Target list - new pesticides and voluntary compounds • Acetamiprid From DIRECTIVE 2002/32/EC • Aldrin • Biphenyl • Voluntary: • Bromuconazole • Chlordane, cis- • Buprofezin • Chlordane, oxy • Chlorantraniliprole • Chlordane, trans- • Cymoxanil • Endrin • Dieldrin • Heptachlor • Famoxadone • Heptachlorepoxid-cis • Flutolanil • Heptachlorepoxid-trans • Methamidophos • Pencycuron • Propamocarb • Tau-Fluvalinate • Tefluthrin • Tetraconazole • Tetramethrin National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Acephate Difenoconazole Imidacloprid Prothioconazole-desthio Acetamiprid Diflubenzuron Iprodione Pyraclostrobin Aldrin Dimethoate Isocarbophos Pyrimethanil Azinphos-methyl Diniconazole Isoprothiolane Quinoxyfen Azoxystrobin Endosulfan-alpha Isoproturon Spiromesifen Bifenthrin Endosulfan-beta Kresoxim-methyl Spiroxamine Biphenyl Endosulfan-sulfate Lambda-cyhalothrin Tau-Fluvalinate Bixafen Epoxiconazole Lindane Tebuconazole Boscalid Ethion Linuron Tebufenozide Bromuconazole Ethirimol Malaoxon Tefluthrin Buprofezin Famoxadone Malathion Terbuthylazine Carbaryl Fenbuconazole Mandipropamid Tetraconazole Carbendazim Fenhexamid Metconazole Tetramethrin Carbofuran Fenitrothion Methacrifos Thiabendazole Carbofuran, 3-hydroxy Fenpropidin Methamidophos Thiacloprid Carboxin Fenpropimorph Methomyl Thiamethoxam Chlorantraniliprole Fenthion Metolachlor Thiodicarb Chlorfenvinphos Fenthion-oxon Metrafenone Thiophanate-methyl Chlorpropham (parent compound only) Fenthion-oxon-sulfone Metribuzin Triadimefon Chlorpyrifos Fenthion-oxon-sulfoxide Omethoate Triadimenol Chlorpyrifos-methyl Fenthion-sulfone Oxydemeton-methyl Triazophos Clothianidin Fenthion-sulfoxide Paclobutrazol Tricyclazole Cyfluthrin (sum of isomers) Fenvalerate and Esfenvalerate Parathion Trifloxystrobin Cymoxanil Fipronil (parent compound only) Penconazole Trifluralin Cypermethrin (sum of isomers) Flonicamid Pencycuron Triticonazole Cyproconazole Fludioxonil Pendimethalin Vinclozolin (parent compound only) Cyprodinil Fluopyram Permethrin (sum of isomers) DDD- p,p' Fluquinconazole Phenylphenol-ortho Voluntary DDE- p,p' Flusilazole Phosphamidon Chlordane, cis- DDT- o,p' Flutolanil Pirimicarb Chlordane, oxy DDT- p,p' Flutriafol Pirimicarb-desmethyl Chlordane, trans- Deltamethrin-cis Fluxapyroxad Pirimiphos-methyl Endrin Demeton-S-methylsulfone HCH-alpha Prochloraz (parent compound only) Heptachlor Diazinon HCH-beta Procymidone Heptachlorepoxid-cis Dichlorvos Hexaconazole Propamocarb Heptachlorepoxid-trans National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Dieldrin Imazalil Propiconazole Participation Country # labs Country # labs Country # labs Albania 1 France 8 Poland 16 Argentina 1 Germany 24 Portugal 2 Australia 1 Greece 3 Romania 9 Austria 2 Hungary 4 Serbia 2 Belgium 3 Iceland 1 Singapore 1 Brazil 3 India 2 Slovakia 2 Bulgaria 2 Indonesia 1 Slovenia 5 China 1 Ireland 1 Spain 22 Croatia 7 Israel 1 Sweden 2 Cyprus 2 Italy 25 Switzerland 1 Czech Republic 3 Latvia 1 Tanzania 2 Denmark 1 Lithuania 1 Thailand 3 Egypt 1 Luxembourg 1 United Kingdom 3 Estonia 1 Netherlands 6 Finland 2 Norway 2 Total 178 National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Participation Country # labs Country # labs Country # labs Albania 1 France 8 Poland 16 Argentina 1 Germany 24 Portugal 2 Australia 1 Greece 3 Romania 9 Austria 2 Hungary 4 Serbia 2 Belgium 3 Iceland 1 Singapore 1 Brazil 3 India 2 Slovakia 2 Bulgaria 2 Indonesia 1 Slovenia 3 China 1 Ireland 1 Spain 22 Croatia 7 Israel 1 Sweden 2 Cyprus 2 Italy 25 Switzerland 1 Czech Republic 3 Latvia 1 Tanzania 2 Denmark 1 Lithuania 1 Thailand 1 Egypt 1 Luxembourg 1 United Kingdom 3 Estonia 1 Netherlands 6 Finland 2 Norway 2 Total 178 National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Rye • Grown in Denmark in 2015 • Field treated by Aarhus University, Research Department Flakkebjerg National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Pesticides in test material Pesticide Field application Spike in laboratory Formulation or standard Azoxystrobin x Amistar Bixafen x Aviator Boscalid x Viverda Buprofezin x Analytical standard Carbendazim x Benlate Cypermethrin x x Cyperb Epoxiconazole x Viverda Fenpropidin x Tern Fluopyram x Propulse Isocarbophos x Analytical standard Metrafenone x Flexity Pencycuron x Analytical standard Pirimicarb-desmethyl x Analytical standard Prothioconazole x Aviator and Propulse Pyraclostrobin x Viverda Tebuconazole x Folicur Tetramethrin x Analytical standard Heptachlor x Analytical standard National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Spike procedure National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Sample shipment • Samples were distributed on Monday 7 and 8 March 2016 (17 February to non-EU and EFTA Countries) • Most samples were delivered to EU laboratories within one day National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Homogeniety test 2 2 Mean, mg/kg Ss c Ss < c Azoxys trobin 0.087 0.00000 0.0001 Pass Bixafen 0.073 0.00000 0.0001 Pass Boscalid 0.422 0.00030 0.0020 Pass Buprofezin 0.048 0.00000 0.0000 Pass Carbendazim 0.077 0.00000 0.0001 Pass Cypermethrin 0.140 0.00011 0.0004 Pass Epoxiconazole 0.173 0.00005 0.0004 Pass Fenpropidin 0.313 0.00007 0.0012 Pass Fluopyram 0.257 0.00006 0.0007 Pass Heptachlor 0.031 0.00000 0.0000 Pass Isocarbophos 0.048 0 0.0000 Pass Metribuzin 0.351 0.00057 0.0016 Pass Metrafenone 0.086 0.00001 0.0001 Pass Pencycuron 0.032 0.00000 0.0000 Pass Pirimicarb desmethyl 0.050 0 0.0000 Pass Prothioconazole desthio 0.112 0.00001 0.0002 Pass Pyraclostrobin 0.098 0.00002 0.0001 Pass Tebuconazole 0.099 0.00002 0.0001 Pass National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Stability test Storage at -18 degrees | x1 - yi | ≤ Mean, mg/kg | x1 - yi | 0.3×σ 0.3×σ Azoxys trobin 0.089 0.001 0.007 Pass Bixafen 0.077 0.002 0.006 Pass Boscalid 0.436 0.029 0.031 Pass Buprofezin 0.044 0.002 0.004 Pass Carbendazim 0.077 0.003 0.006 Pass Cypermethrin 0.110 0.000 0.010 Pass Epoxiconazole 0.190 0.009 0.013 Pass Fenpropidin 0.382 0.003 0.026 Pass Fluopyram 0.262 0.014 0.019 Pass Heptachlor 0.057 0.001 0.002 Pass Isocarbophos 0.046 0.003 0.004 Pass Metrafenone 0.092 0.003 0.007 Pass Pencycuron 0.022 0.001 0.002 Pass Pirimicarb desmethyl 0.049 0.001 0.004 Pass Prothioconazole desthio 0.113 0.004 0.011 Pass Pyraclostrobin 0.101 0.005 0.007 Pass Tebuconazole 0.093 0.001 0.007 Pass Tetramethrin 0.096 0.003 0.000 Pass National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Stability test Storage at -18 degrees Storage at room temperature | x1 - yi | ≤ | x1 - yi | ≤ Mean, mg/kg | x1 - yi | 0.3×σ 0.3×σ | x1 - yi | 0.3×σ 0.3×σ Azoxys trobin 0.089 0.001 0.007 Pass 0.001 0.007 Pass Bixafen 0.077 0.002 0.006 Pass 0.001 0.006 Pass Boscalid 0.436 0.029 0.031 Pass 0.001 0.031 Pass Buprofezin 0.044 0.002 0.004 Pass 0.002 0.004 Pass Carbendazim 0.077 0.003 0.006 Pass 0.002 0.006 Pass Cypermethrin 0.110 0.000 0.010 Pass 0.006 0.010 Pass Epoxiconazole 0.190 0.009 0.013 Pass 0.005 0.013 Pass Fenpropidin 0.382 0.003 0.026 Pass 0.020 0.026 Pass Fluopyram 0.262 0.014 0.019 Pass 0.004 0.019 Pass Heptachlor 0.057 0.001 0.002 Pass 0.031 0.002 Fail Isocarbophos 0.046 0.003 0.004 Pass 0.004 0.004 Fail Metrafenone 0.092 0.003 0.007 Pass 0.002 0.007 Pass Pencycuron 0.022 0.001 0.002 Pass 0.017 0.002 Fail Pirimicarb desmethyl 0.049 0.001 0.004 Pass 0.010 0.004 Fail Prothioconazole desthio 0.113 0.004 0.011 Pass 0.003 0.011 Pass Pyraclostrobin 0.101 0.005 0.007 Pass 0.003 0.007 Pass Tebuconazole 0.093 0.001 0.007 Pass 0.006 0.007 Pass Tetramethrin 0.096 0.003 0.000 Pass 0.005 0.000 Pass National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Calculation of assigned values and uncertainty of assigned values • Algoritm A mean of the results from EU laboratories (and EFTA) – Only result from participant that • Reported to add water to the samples before extration or • used mixture of solvent and water or • used ASE • Outliers • Only obvious uncorrect results • Uncertainty • =1.25 *( ) • s* is robust∗ standard deviation (Alg A standard deviation) /√ • n is the number of participants National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Assigned values only Assigned values water addition, PESTICIDES mg/kg Azoxystrobin 0.088 Bixafen 0.074 Boscalid 0.414 Buprofezin 0.048 Carbendazim 0.086 Cypermethrin 0.134 Epoxiconazole 0.177 Fenpropidin 0.347 Fluopyram 0.250 Isocarbophos 0.048 Metrafenone 0.088 Pencycuron 0.033 Pirimicarb-desmethyl 0.048 Prothioconazole-desthio 0.149 Pyraclostrobin 0.098 Tebuconazole 0.091 Tetramethrin 0.096 Heptachlor 0.032 National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Reported results and false negatives No.
Recommended publications
  • Insecticide Residue Analyses in Cucumbers Sampled from Çanakkale Open Markets1 Çanakkale Açık Pazarlarından Örneklenen Hıyarlarda Insektisit Kalıntı Analizleri

    Insecticide Residue Analyses in Cucumbers Sampled from Çanakkale Open Markets1 Çanakkale Açık Pazarlarından Örneklenen Hıyarlarda Insektisit Kalıntı Analizleri

    Türk. entomol. derg., 2020, 44 (4): 449-460 ISSN 1010-6960 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.16970/entoted.767482 E-ISSN 2536-491X Original article (Orijinal araştırma) Insecticide residue analyses in cucumbers sampled from Çanakkale open markets1 Çanakkale açık pazarlarından örneklenen hıyarlarda insektisit kalıntı analizleri Hayriye ÇATAK2 Osman TİRYAKİ3* Abstract The aim of this study was to investigate four insecticide residues in cucumbers with the aid of QuEChERS 2007.1 method. For method verification assessment, pesticide-free cucumber matrix was spiked with 0.1, 1 and 10 times of MRL for each pesticide. The QuEChERS-LC-MS/MS analytical method revealed that the detection limits of the insecticides were below the MRLs and the overall recovery of method was 97.7%. These figures were within the SANTE recovery limits (60-140%) and the values specified for the repeatability (≤20%). Cucumbers were collected from six different stands (A-F) at Çanakkale open markets for 6 weeks between 23 November and 28 December 2018. Residues of each sampling time and each stand were assessed. Acetamiprid residue of 257g and 236 µg/kg were detected in week 5 from stand B and in week 2 from stand E, respectively. These values are close to MRL (300 µg/kg). Formetanate hydrochloride residue of the week 3 from stand F (36.3 µg/kg) was more than MRL of 10 µg/kg. Pirimiphos methyl and chlorpyrifos residues were not detected in cucumbers. Theoretical maximum daily intake assessment showed that there was no chronic exposure risk for these four pesticides through cucumber consumption. Keywords: Cucumber, insecticide residues, QuEChERS, risk assessment, toxicology Öz Bu çalışma hıyarlarda dört insektisit kalıntısını QuEChERS 2007.1 yöntemi ile belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır.
  • Monitoring of Pesticide Residues in Commonly Used Fruits and Vegetables in Kuwait

    Monitoring of Pesticide Residues in Commonly Used Fruits and Vegetables in Kuwait

    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Article Monitoring of Pesticide Residues in Commonly Used Fruits and Vegetables in Kuwait Mustapha F. A. Jallow *, Dawood G. Awadh, Mohammed S. Albaho, Vimala Y. Devi and Nisar Ahmad Environment and Life Sciences Research Center, Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research, P.O. Box 24885, Safat 13109, Kuwait; [email protected] (D.G.A.); [email protected] (M.S.A.); [email protected] (V.Y.D.); [email protected] (N.A.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +965-249-8984 Received: 1 May 2017; Accepted: 12 July 2017; Published: 25 July 2017 Abstract: The presence of pesticide residues in primary and derived agricultural products raises serious health concerns for consumers. The aim of this study was to assess the level of pesticide residues in commonly consumed fruits and vegetables in Kuwait. A total of 150 samples of different fresh vegetables and fruits were analyzed for the presence of 34 pesticides using the quick easy cheap effective rugged and safe (QuEChERS) multi-residue extraction, followed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Pesticide residues above the maximum residue limits (MRL) were detected in 21% of the samples and 79% of the samples had no residues of the pesticides surveyed or contained residues below the MRL. Multiple residues were present in 40% of the samples with two to four pesticides, and four samples were contaminated with more than four pesticide residues. Of the pesticides investigated, 16 were detected, of which imidacloprid, deltamethrin, cypermethrin, malathion, acetamiprid, monocrotophos, chlorpyrifos-methyl, and diazinon exceeded their MRLs.
  • Carpenter Ants and Control in Homes Page 1 of 6

    Carpenter Ants and Control in Homes Page 1 of 6

    Carpenter Ants and Control in Homes Page 1 of 6 Carpenter Ants and Control in Homes Fact Sheet No. 31 Revised May 2000 Dr. Jay B Karren, Extension Entomologist Alan H. Roe, Insect Diagnostician Introduction Carpenter ants are members of the insect order Hymenoptera, which includes bees, wasps, sawflies, and other ants. Carpenter ants can be occasional pests in the home and are noted particularly for the damage they can cause when nesting in wood. In Utah they are more of a nuisance rather than a major structural pest. Carpenter ants, along with a number of other ant species, utilize cavities in wood, particularly stumps and logs in decayed condition, as nesting sites. They are most abundant in forests and can be easily found under loose bark of dead trees, stumps, or fallen logs. Homeowners may bring them into their homes when they transport infested logs from forests to use as firewood. Description Carpenter ants include species that are among the largest ants found in the United States. They are social insects with a complex and well-defined caste system. The worker ants are sterile females and may occur in different sizes (majors and minors). Members of the reproductive caste (fertile males and females) are usually winged prior to mating. All ants develop from eggs deposited by a fertilized female (queen). The eggs hatch into grub-like larvae (immatures) which are fed and cared for by the workers. When fully grown, the larvae spin a cocoon and enter the pupal stage. The pupal stage is a period of transformation from the larva to adult.
  • Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries

    Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries

    Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries. Peter Jentsch Extension Associate Department of Entomology Cornell University's Hudson Valley Lab 3357 Rt. 9W; PO box 727 Highland, NY 12528 email: [email protected] Phone 845-691-7151 Mobile: 845-417-7465 http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/ent/faculty/jentsch/ 2 Historical Perspectives on Fruit Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Chemistries. by Peter Jentsch I. Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 Synthetic Pesticide Development and Use II. Influences Changing the Pest Management Profile in Apple Production Chemical Residues in Early Insect Management Historical Chemical Regulation Recent Regulation Developments Changing Pest Management Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 The Science Behind The Methodology Pesticide Revisions – Requirements For New Registrations III. Resistance of Insect Pests to Insecticides Resistance Pest Management Strategies IV. Reduced Risk Chemistries: New Modes of Action and the Insecticide Treadmill Fermentation Microbial Products Bt’s, Abamectins, Spinosads Juvenile Hormone Analogs Formamidines, Juvenile Hormone Analogs And Mimics Insect Growth Regulators Azadirachtin, Thiadiazine Neonicotinyls Major Reduced Risk Materials: Carboxamides, Carboxylic Acid Esters, Granulosis Viruses, Diphenyloxazolines, Insecticidal Soaps, Benzoyl Urea Growth Regulators, Tetronic Acids, Oxadiazenes , Particle Films, Phenoxypyrazoles, Pyridazinones, Spinosads, Tetrazines , Organotins, Quinolines. 3 I Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 The apple has a rather ominous origin. Its inception is framed in the biblical text regarding the genesis of mankind. The backdrop appears to be the turbulent setting of what many scholars believe to be present day Iraq.
  • Silverfish and Firebrats

    Silverfish and Firebrats

    SilverfiSh and firebratS Integrated Pest Management In and Around the Home If items on your bookshelf have Although small nymphs (those that are chewed-on pages and bindings, sus- less than 1/8 inch long) lack scales, both pect the look-alike household pests large nymphs and adults have them. If silverfish and firebrats. Both insects you see scales around or beneath dam- have enzymes in their gut that digest aged items, it is a good indication that cellulose, and they choose book cases, these pests are the culprits. The scales closets, and places where books, cloth- are delicate, dustlike, and slightly in- ing, starch, or dry foods are available. candescent in the light, and they stick to most surfaces. Silverfish and firebrats are nocturnal and hide during the day. If the object LIFE CYCLE Figure 1. Adult firebrat (left) and silver- they are hiding beneath is moved, they fish. Eggs of both species are about 1/25 of will dart toward another secluded an inch long. The females lay the eggs place. They come out at night to seek in crevices, on cloth, or buried in food food and water. Both insects prefer or dust. The average clutch contains 50 dry food such as cereals, flour, pasta, eggs, but this can vary from 1 to 200. and pet food; paper with glue or paste; Firebrat eggs hatch in about 14 days and sizing in paper including wall paper; silverfish eggs in about 19 to 32 days. In book bindings; and starch in cloth- colder environments eggs can remain ing.
  • Pesticides Registration List 2018

    Pesticides Registration List 2018

    Pesticides Registration List 2018 Name of Chemicals Type Common Name Registration Types Registrant Syngenta AGROIN, 39,Broad Street, Charlestown, Georgetown, Guyana. 592 -689-4624 and 611-3890 Importer/Distributor Actara 25WG Insecticide Thiamethoxam General Use Actellic 50Ec Insecticide Pirimiphos methyl General Use Cruiser 350FS Insecticide Thiamethoxam General Use Demand 2.5CS Insecticide Thiamethoxam & Lambda Cyhalothrin General Use Demon MaX Insecticide Cypermethrin General Use Engeo Insecticide Thiamethoxam & Lambda Cyhalothrin General Use Match 50EC Insecticide Lufenuron General Use Ninja 5EC Insecticide Lambda Cyhalothrin General Use Pegasus 500Sc Insecticide Diafenthiuron General Use Trigard 75WP Insecticide Cyromazine General Use Vertimec 1.8EC Insecticide Abamectin General Use Dual Gold 960EC Herbicide S-Metolachlor General Use Fusilade Herbicide Fluazifop-p-butyl General Use Gramoxone Super Herbicide Paraquat Dichloride Restricted Use Igran 500SC Herbicide Terbutryn General Use Krismat Herbicide Ametryn General Use Reglone Herbicide Diquat Dibromide General Use Touchdown IQ Herbicide Glyphosate General Use Amistar 50WG Fungicide Azoxystrobin General Use Bankit 25 SC Fungicide Azoxystrobin General Use Daconil 720Sc Fungicide Chlorothalonil General Use Tilt 250 EC Fungicide Propiconazole General Use Klerat Wax Blocks Rodenticide Brodifacoum General Use Registrant Rotam Agrochemical Co., Ltd AGROIN, 39,Broad Street, Charlestown, Georgetown, Guyana. 592 -689-4624 and 611-3890 Importer/Distributor Saddler 35 FS Insecticide Thiodicarb
  • Genetically Modified Baculoviruses for Pest

    Genetically Modified Baculoviruses for Pest

    INSECT CONTROL BIOLOGICAL AND SYNTHETIC AGENTS This page intentionally left blank INSECT CONTROL BIOLOGICAL AND SYNTHETIC AGENTS EDITED BY LAWRENCE I. GILBERT SARJEET S. GILL Amsterdam • Boston • Heidelberg • London • New York • Oxford Paris • San Diego • San Francisco • Singapore • Sydney • Tokyo Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier Academic Press, 32 Jamestown Road, London, NW1 7BU, UK 30 Corporate Drive, Suite 400, Burlington, MA 01803, USA 525 B Street, Suite 1800, San Diego, CA 92101-4495, USA ª 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved The chapters first appeared in Comprehensive Molecular Insect Science, edited by Lawrence I. Gilbert, Kostas Iatrou, and Sarjeet S. Gill (Elsevier, B.V. 2005). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone (þ44) 1865 843830, fax (þ44) 1865 853333, e-mail [email protected]. Requests may also be completed on-line via the homepage (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissions). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Insect control : biological and synthetic agents / editors-in-chief: Lawrence I. Gilbert, Sarjeet S. Gill. – 1st ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-12-381449-4 (alk. paper) 1. Insect pests–Control. 2. Insecticides. I. Gilbert, Lawrence I. (Lawrence Irwin), 1929- II. Gill, Sarjeet S. SB931.I42 2010 632’.7–dc22 2010010547 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978-0-12-381449-4 Cover Images: (Top Left) Important pest insect targeted by neonicotinoid insecticides: Sweet-potato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci; (Top Right) Control (bottom) and tebufenozide intoxicated by ingestion (top) larvae of the white tussock moth, from Chapter 4; (Bottom) Mode of action of Cry1A toxins, from Addendum A7.
  • (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 8,852,618 B2 Clough (45) Date of Patent: Oct

    (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 8,852,618 B2 Clough (45) Date of Patent: Oct

    USOO8852618B2 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 8,852,618 B2 Clough (45) Date of Patent: Oct. 7, 2014 (54) INSECTICIDAL MIXTURE CONTAINING CA 2429218 A1 6, 2002 GAMMA-CYHALOTHRN CH 689326 A5 4f1995 EP O237227 A1 9, 1987 EP 0771526 A2 5, 1997 (75) Inventor: Martin Stephen Clough, Bracknell EP O988788 A1 3f2000 (GB) FR 272O230 A1 12/1995 JP 63. 126805 A2 5, 1988 (73) Assignee: Syngenta Limited, Guildford (GB) JP 63126805 A2 5, 1988 JP 63126805 5, 1998 c - r WO WO 86 O7525 A1 12, 1986 (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this WO WO 93 03618 A2 3, 1993 patent is extended or adjusted under 35 WO WO95 229O2 A1 8/1995 U.S.C. 154(b) by 824 days. WO WO9533380 A1 12, 1995 WO WO 96 16543 A2 6, 1996 (21) Appl. No.: 12/633,063 WO WO97 06687 A1 2/1997 WO WO974O692 A1 11, 1997 (22) Filed: Dec.a V88, 2009 WO WOOOO2453 A1 1, 2000 OTHER PUBLICATIONS (65) Prior Publication Data US 201O/OO81714 A1 Apr. 1, 2010 Canadian Office Action (Applin. No. 2,452,515 filed: Jul. 10, 2002) mailing date Oct. 1, 2010 (pp. 1-2). Related U.S. Application Data Allen et al. Transgenic & Conventional Insect & Weed Control Sys tems; Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference, vol. 2, 1065 (62) Division of application No. 10/484.745, filed as 1068 (1999), USA. application No. PCT/GB02/03181 on Jul. 10, 2002, Anonymous; Pesticide Mixtures for Control of Insect and Acarid now Pat. No.
  • Signs and Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning

    Signs and Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Historical Materials from University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension Extension 1997 EC97-2505 Signs and Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning Larry D. Schulze University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Clyde Ogg University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Edward F. Vitzthum University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/extensionhist Part of the Agriculture Commons, and the Curriculum and Instruction Commons Schulze, Larry D.; Ogg, Clyde; and Vitzthum, Edward F., "EC97-2505 Signs and Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning" (1997). Historical Materials from University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension. 1225. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/extensionhist/1225 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Extension at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Historical Materials from University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension EC97-2505-A Signs and Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning Larry D. Schulze, Extension Pesticide Coordinator Clyde L. Ogg, Extension Assistant, Pesticide Training Edward F. Vitzthum, Coordinator, Environmental Programs z Manage Your Risk z Signal Words z Read the pesticide Label z Routes of Exposure z Pesticide Toxicity z Recognizing Signs and Symptoms of Poisoning z Recognizing Common pesticide Poisonings { Organophosphate and Carbamate Insecticides { Organochlorine Insecticides { Synthetic Pyrethroid Insecticides { Plant-derived Insecticides { Inorganic Insecticides { Microbial Insecticides { DEET Repellent { Bipyridyl Herbicides { Chlorophenoxy Herbicides { Arsenical Herbicides { Wood Preservatives { Fumigants { Rodenticides { Fungicides z What To Do When Pesticide Poisoning Occurs z References z Pesticide Safety Telephone Numbers Accidental exposure or overexposure to pesticides can have serious implications.
  • Tetramethrin CAS #: 7696-12-0

    Tetramethrin CAS #: 7696-12-0

    Review Date: 12/10/2010 tetramethrin CAS #: 7696-12-0 Type Contact insecticide - sythetic pyrethroid. Controls Flying and crawling insects such as wasps, hornets, cockroaches, ants, fleas, and mosquitos. Mode of Action Tetramethrin effects the central and peripheral nervous system by modulation of the sodium channel resulting in hyperactivity of the nervous system and death. Thurston County Review Summary: The insecticide active ingredient tetramethrin is rated high in hazard by Thurston County's review criteria for carcinogenicity and due to the risk of toxicity to children following specific indoor aerosol uses. Products containing tetramethrin fail the County's review. Tetramethrin is considered low in hazard for the potential to move off the site of application, persistence, and bioaccumulation potential. It is also considered low in hazard for the risk of toxicity to non-target organisms (except insects) - even though it is very highly toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms. MOBILITY Property Value Reference Rating Water Solubility (mg/L) 1.83 1 Low Soil Sorption (Kd=mL/g) Not found Organic Sorption (Koc=mL/g) 1423 1 Moderate Mobility Summary: Tetramehtrin is not very soluble in water and adheres moderately to soil containing organic material. Because tetramethrin is not likely to persist more than one day and adheres moderately to soil, the hazard of tetramethrin to move off the site of application is rated low. PERSISTENCE Property Value Reference Rating Vapor Pressure (mm Hg) 0.0000071 1 High Biotic or Aerobic Half-life (days) 3 1 Low Abiotic Half-life (days) 0.32 1 Low Terrestrial Field Test Half-life (days) <1 2 Low Hydrolysis Half-life (days) 1 (pH = 7) 2 Low Anaerobic Half-life (days) Not found Aquatic Field Test Half-life (days) 1 or less 2 Low Persistence Summary: Tetramethrin is very susceptable to degradation by sunlight and interaction with water.
  • Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision for Imidacloprid

    Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision for Imidacloprid

    Docket Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844 www.regulations.gov Imidacloprid Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision Case Number 7605 January 2020 Approved by: Elissa Reaves, Ph.D. Acting Director Pesticide Re-evaluation Division Date: __ 1-22-2020 __ Docket Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844 www.regulations.gov Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 4 A. Summary of Imidacloprid Registration Review............................................................... 5 B. Summary of Public Comments on the Draft Risk Assessments and Agency Responses 7 II. USE AND USAGE ............................................................................................................... 14 III. SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENTS ......................................................................................... 15 A. Human Health Risks....................................................................................................... 15 1. Risk Summary and Characterization .......................................................................... 15 2. Human Incidents and Epidemiology .......................................................................... 17 3. Tolerances ................................................................................................................... 18 4. Human Health Data Needs ......................................................................................... 18 B. Ecological Risks ............................................................................................................
  • Factors Affecting Secondary Kill of the German Cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) by Gel Baits

    Factors Affecting Secondary Kill of the German Cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) by Gel Baits

    Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Urban Pests 153 William H Robinson and Dániel Bajomi (editors), 2008 Printed by OOK-Press Kft., H-8200 Veszprém, Pápai út 37/a, Hungary FACTORS AFFECTING SECONDARY KILL OF THE GERMAN COCKROACH (DICTYOPTERA: BLATTELLIDAE) BY GEL BAITS 1CHANGLU WANG, 2 X. YANG, 1M.A. EL-NOUR, AND 1G.W. BENNETT Center for Urban and Industrial Pest Management, Department of Entomology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907 USA 2Guangxi Department of Forestry, Nanning, Guangxi 530022, China Abstract Secondary kill of the German cockroach, Blattella germanica (L)., by baits was reported to increase the overall control efficacy of bait products. However, most studies have been based on laboratory strains and small nymphs. We compared the secondary kill of four cockroach gel baits against various developmental stages of a laboratory (Jwax) and a field (Dorie) strain B. germanica. The four baits were: 0.35% acetamiprid (Transport), 0.01% fipronil (Maxforce FC), 2.15% hydramethylnon (Maxforce), and 0.6% indoxacarb (Advion). In addition, the secondary kill by acetamiprid, hydramethylnon, and indoxacarb was evaluated against mixed-stage cockroach populations. All baits exhibited secondary kill against various developmental stages of B. germanica. The levels of secondary mortality decreased from 100% in the first instars to as low as 12.1% in adult males. The field strain was much less susceptible than the laboratory strain, with only 9.2-16.6% secondary mortality among the 3rd- 4th instars. Acetamiprid caused significantly lower secondary mortality of the laboratory strain first instars than fipronil, hydramethylnon, and indoxacarb. In an experiment evaluating direct and secondary kill against mixed-stage populations (100 total per experimental arena), the direct kill by acetamiprid, hydramethylnon, and indoxacarb was 40.0, 74.0, and 98.5%, respectively.