Safer Neonic-Free Pesticides

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Safer Neonic-Free Pesticides Website: www.smartonpesticides.org Facebook: http://on.fb.me/Ut6rrX Twitter: @PesticidesSmart #beesafe Neonicotinoid-Free Consumer Pesticide Products Maryland citizens, scientists, beekeepers and healthcare advocates, are alarmed about the widespread use of neonicotinoid pesticides (aka neonics), in hundreds of home and garden consumer products. Neonics have been confirmed to contribute to honey bee mortality, declines in native pollinators, birds and aquatic life; are linked to the death of molting blue crabs; and pose a risk to human health. Neonics also kill beneficial insects, making landscapes chemically dependent for insect control. THERE ARE OVER 290 NEONIC-FREE PRODUCTS FOR COMMON PESTS THAT ARE SAFER FOR HONEYBEES. Here is a sample list of neonicotinoid-free products for 30 of the most common home & garden pests Resources: PRI Product Evaluator, Beyond Pesticides, Xerces Society ; PRI Product Evaluator available for mobile through iTunes store) # of Neonic- Neonic-Free Products of Least Concern to Honey Bees Insect Pest Free Tier * Neonic-free products which may be linked to health and/or other wildlife and aquatic impacts are marked with asterisk 3 ** Insecticidal soaps, horticultural oils & limonene are low risk to bees ft applied at night, when bees are inactive Products Mint oil, Drax Liquidator Ant Safer Brand Ant & Cinnacure A3005 EcoPCO ACU cedar oil, Ants 53 Bait Gourmet Ant Bait Gel Crawling Insect Killer orange oil garlic spray Purespray Green, Leaf Life Gavicide Green ** Orange Guard for Adelgids ** Civitas Golden Pest Spray Oil Horticultural oils, 10 415 Ornamental Plants Insecticidal soaps Insecticidal BFR 440 Supreme Spray Cinnacure A3005 Clean Crop Supreme Essentria IC3 Aphid-Pruf soaps, Neem Aphids 33 Oil Oil oil NEU 1160 Vegetable Oil Purespray Green or Beetles Essentria IC3 Golden Pest Spray Oil Boric acid 5 Insecticide Purespray Spray Oil 10 E Centipedes, Mosquito & Tick Control EcoPCO ACU ** Whitmire Micro-Gen Millipedes & T*A*P* (indoor use) Yard Pro-tection Boric acid 12 TC 232 Sowbugs Concentrate Safer Brand Garden ** Whitmire Micro-Gen Crickets & Mosquito & Tick Control Redzone Bait Fungicide, Insecticide & Essentria IC3 TC 232 Katydids 22 Yard Protection Concentrate Miticide Ready-to-Use Dipel Regular or 2X Cutworms, Agree 50 WP or Bonide Dipem 150 Dust for Cinnacure A3005 Golden Pest Spray Oil Biological Insecticide Armyworms 26 Agree WG Vegetables Wettable Powder Safe Brand Garden Earwigs & Fungicide, Insecticide & Surround WP Crop Redzone Bait EcoPCO ACU Essentria IC3 Springtails 17 Miticide Read-to-Use Protectant Spray Eaton’s Answer Boric Diatomaceous earth ** Whitmire Micro-Gen EcoSmart Insect Killer Acid Insecticidal Dust Dri-out Insecticide (indoor use), Silica TC 232 EcoPCO ACU Fleas 20 for Lawns & Landscapes (indoor use) aerogel, Boric acid EcoSmart Insect Killer * RF 9707 Flies ** Whitmire Micro-Gen Vector 960 BMP 144 Cinnacure A3005 Spray for Lawns & Aerlosol 25 TC 232 Landscapes Grubs & Bacillus Thuringiensis, Milky Surround WP Crop 9 Cinnacure A3005 Prokil Cryolite 50 Dust Zone Defense Maggots spore, Nematodes Protectant Silica Hornets, ** Whitmire Micro-Gen Rescue W·H·Y Trap for Soap and water, Enzyme aerogel, Wasps, Hornets & solution (such as Super Acetic acid, Wasps, Essentria IC3 TC 232 EcoPCO ACU 11 Yellowjackets C Professional) Boric acid, Yellow Jackets Peppermint oil Surefire Japanese Beetle Japanese Bag-A-Bug Japanese EcoPCO ACU Trap Milky spore 5 Beetle Trap Beetles Safer Brand Garden Purespray Green and Leaf Life Gavicide Green Fungicide, Insecticide, & Surround WP Crop Lace Bugs Golden Pest Spray Oil 13 415 MIticide Ready-to-Use Protectant Purespray Spray Oil Spray 10E Safer Brand Garden Purespray Green and Ringer Aphid Mite Leafhopper Cinnacure A3005 Golden Pest Spray Oil Fungicide, Insecticide & 14 Attack/Fruit & Vegetable Purespray Spray Oil Miticide Read-to-Use Spray 10E Locusts & Prokil Cryolite 96 or 50 Surround WP Crop Essentria IC3 EcoPCO ACU Grass-hoppers 6 Dust Protectant # of Neonic- Neonic-Free Products of Least Concern to Honey Bees Insect Pest Free Tier * Neonic-free products which may be linked to health and/or other wildlife and aquatic impacts are marked with asterisk 3 ** Insecticidal soaps, horticultural oils & limonene are low risk to bees ft applied at night, when bees are inactive Products Bonide Dipel Regular or 2X Dipel Bio Garden Spray Bacillus Agree 50 WP or Agree Cinnacure A3005 Loopers * BT 320 Sulfur 25 Dust Biological Insecticide or Dipel WP Home & Thuringiensis 22 WG Wettable Powder Garden Insecticide (BT) Moth Larvae Control KBR 3023 All-family Insect * Agnique MMF GR Vectobac 12AS Midges BPM 144 (2X) BMP 144 Repellant Non-aerosol 7 Mosquito Liquid Biological Larvicide Spray Safer Brand Garden BFR 440 Supreme ** Orange Guard for Mites Fungicide, Insecticide & BFR 440 Supreme Spray Oil Cinnacure A3005 71 Spray oil Ornamental Plants Miticide Ready-to-Use Bacillus Bonide Mosquito Cutter Natural Insect Thuringiensis, BMP 144 Vectobac – AS or 12As Beater WSP Repellent Citronella oil, EcoPCO ACU Mosquitoes 35 Biologic Larvicide Linalool, Oil of Lemon Eucalyptus, Psylla & BFR 440 Supreme Britz 415 or Supreme Purespray Green or 22 Gavicide Super 90 Golden Pest Spray Oil Psyllids Spray Oil Spray Oil Purespray Spray Oil Safer Roach & Ant EcoSmart Ant & Roach Dri-out Insecticide EcoPCO ACU Redzone Bait Roaches 41 Gourmet Ant Bait Gel Killing Powder Killer Safer Brand Garden BFR 440 Supreme Britz 415 Supreme Oil or Fungicide, Insect-icide & ** Orange Guard for Scale Insects Cinnacure A3005 29 Spray Oil Spray Oil Miticide Ready-to-Use Ornamental Plants Spray EcoSmart Insect Killer EcoSmart Spider ** Whitmire Micro-Gen TC EcoPCO ACU Dri-out Insecticide Spray for Lawns & Sticky traps Spiders 12 Blaster 232 Landscapes Silica BorActin Insecticide Bonide Bacillus aerogel, Thuringiensis (BT) Moth Zone Defense Agent Gold Boric acid, Powder Aphid-Pruf Termites 290 Larvae (Caterpillar) Metarhizium Control anisoplae, Nematodes Dusting Sulfur Fungicide- BFR 440 Supreme Spray Thrips Golden Pest Spray Oil Cosavet DF Cinnacure A3005 33 Insecticide Oil Bonide Bacillus Dipel Regular or 2X Purespray Green or Thuringiensis (BT) Moth Bonide Dipem 150 Dust for Biological Insecticide Webworms Golden Pest Spray Oil Purespray Spray Oil 23 Larvae (Caterpillar) Vegetables Wettable Powder or Dipel 10E Control Bio Garden Spray I Cinnacure A3005 Weevils 17 Prokil Cryolite 50 Dust Agree 50 WP EcoPCO ACU Essentria IC3 Insecticidal soap, sticky Whiteflies Golden Pest Spray Oil Aphid-Pruf Cinnacure A3005 Gavicide Super 90 25 tape and cards Wood-boring Prokil Cryolite 96 Cinnacure A3005 * Board Defense Beetleblock-Verbenone * Sunspray 6E Beetles 19 Understanding Pesticide Hazard Tier Rating* The LEED-compliant pesticide product Hazard Tier Rating system, Pesticide Product Hazard Tier rankings, allow consumers and property managers to make informed decisions about choosing less toxic neonicotinoid –free pesticide products. (PRI Hazard Tier Evaluator, www.pesticideresearch.com) Hazard Tier 1 – HIGHEST CONCERN - Over 230 products contain neonicotinoids are rated Tier 1 The formulated product is listed by US EPA as a Restricted Use Product (RUP), and/or is highly toxic to people, fish or other aquatic life, birds, wildlife, or honey bees. Hazard Tier 2 – MODERATE CONCERN - Over 30 products contain neonicotinoids are rated Tier 2 The formulated product is moderately toxic to people, fish or other aquatic life, birds, wildlife, or honey bees. Hazard Tier 3 – LOWER CONCERN - Over 290 products (none contain neonicotinoids) are rated Tier 3 The formulated product is listed as low acute toxicity and/or has no warnings about toxicity to honey bees. Neonicotinoid chemical names include: Acetamiprid, Clothianidin, Dinotefuran, Imidacloprid, Nitenpyram (commonly sold as Capstar), Thiacloprid and Thiamethoxam. The Smart on Pesticides Maryland coalition works to protect Marylanders and the natural systems we depend upon from the toxic impacts of pesticides. The coalition includes more than 55 organizations, and institutions representing communities, businesses, health care providers, farmers, environmentalists, Waterkeepers, interfaith congregants as well as environmental justice, public health and wildlife advocates .
Recommended publications
  • Evaluation of Fluralaner and Afoxolaner Treatments to Control Flea
    Dryden et al. Parasites & Vectors (2016) 9:365 DOI 10.1186/s13071-016-1654-7 RESEARCH Open Access Evaluation of fluralaner and afoxolaner treatments to control flea populations, reduce pruritus and minimize dermatologic lesions in naturally infested dogs in private residences in west central Florida USA Michael W. Dryden1*, Michael S. Canfield2, Kimberly Kalosy1, Amber Smith1, Lisa Crevoiserat1, Jennifer C. McGrady1, Kaitlin M. Foley1, Kathryn Green2, Chantelle Tebaldi2, Vicki Smith1, Tashina Bennett1, Kathleen Heaney3, Lisa Math3, Christine Royal3 and Fangshi Sun3 Abstract Background: A study was conducted to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two different oral flea and tick products to control flea infestations, reduce pruritus and minimize dermatologic lesions over a 12 week period on naturally infested dogs in west central FL USA. Methods: Thirty-four dogs with natural flea infestations living in 17 homes were treated once with a fluralaner chew on study day 0. Another 27 dogs living in 17 different homes were treated orally with an afoxolaner chewable on day 0, once between days 28–30 and once again between days 54–60. All products were administered according to label directions by study investigators. Flea populations on pets were assessed using visual area counts and premise flea infestations were assessed using intermittent-light flea traps on days 0, 7, 14, 21, and once between days 28–30, 40–45, 54–60 and 82–86. Dermatologic assessments were conducted on day 0 and once monthly. Pruritus assessments were conducted by owners throughout the study. No concurrent treatments for existing skin disease (antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, anti-fungals) were allowed.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemicals Implicated in Colony Collapse Disorder
    Chemicals Implicated While research is underway to determine the cause of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), pesticides have emerged as one of the prime suspects. Recent bans in Europe attest to the growing concerns surrounding pesticide use and honeybee decline. Neonicotinoids Neonicotinoids are a relatively new class of insecticides that share a common mode of action that affect the central nervous system of insects, resulting in paralysis and death. They include imidacloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin, dinotefuran, nithiazine, thiacloprid and thiamethoxam. According to the EPA, uncertainties have been identified since their initial registration regarding the potential environmental fate and effects of neonicotinoid pesticides, particularly as they relate to pollinators. Studies conducted in the late 1990s suggest that neonicotinic residues can accumulate in pollen and nectar of treated plants and represent a potential risk to pollinators. There is major concern that neonicotinoid pesticides may play a role in recent pollinator declines. Neonicotinoids can also be persistent in the environment, and when used as seed treatments, translocate to residues in pollen and nectar of treated plants. The potential for these residues to affect bees and other pollinators remain uncertain. Despite these uncertainties, neonicotinoids are beginning to dominate the market place, putting pollinators at risk. The case of the neonicotinoids exemplifies two critical problems with current registration procedures and risk assessment methods for pesticides: the reliance on industry-funded science that contradicts peer-reviewed studies and the insufficiency of current risk assessment procedures to account for sublethal effects of pesticides. • Imidacloprid Used in agriculture as foliar and seed treatments, for indoor and outdoor insect control, home gardening and pet products, imidacloprid is the most popular neonicotinoid, first registered in 1994 under the trade names Merit®, Admire®, Advantage TM.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 161/Tuesday, August 24, 2021
    Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 47221 EPA–APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS State effective Missouri citation Title date EPA approval date Explanation Missouri Department of Natural Resources ******* Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the State of Missouri ******* 10–6.110 ........... Reporting Emission Data, Emis- 3/30/2021 8/24/2021, [Insert Federal Reg- Section (3)(A), Emission Fees, sion Fees, and Process Infor- ister citation]. has not been approved as part mation. of the SIP. ******* * * * * * ACTION: Final rule. year. To the maximum extent prudent and determinable, we must designate PART 70—STATE OPERATING PERMIT SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and critical habitat for any species that we PROGRAMS Wildlife Service (Service), are listing the determine to be an endangered or Franklin’s bumble bee (Bombus threatened species under the Act. ■ 3. The authority citation for part 70 franklini), an invertebrate species from Listing a species as an endangered or continues to read as follows: Douglas, Jackson, and Josephine threatened species and designation of Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. Counties in Oregon, and Siskiyou and critical habitat can only be completed Trinity Counties in California, as an ■ 4. In appendix A to part 70 the entry by issuing a rule. endangered species under the What this document does. This rule for ‘‘Missouri’’ is amended by adding Endangered Species Act of 1973, as paragraph (jj) to read as follows: lists Franklin’s bumble bee (Bombus amended (Act). This rule adds this franklini) as an endangered species Appendix A to Part 70—Approval species to the Federal List of under the Act.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the Nation's Most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds
    The Impact of the Nation’s Most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds Neonicotinoid Insecticides and Birds The Impact of the Nation’s Most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds American Bird Conservancy, March 2013 Grasshopper Sparrow by Luke Seitz Cover photos: Horned Lark and chicks by Middleton Evans; Corn field, stock.xchng, sxc.hu; Calico Pennant dragonfly by David Cappaert, Michigan State University, Bugwood.org 1 Neonicotinoid Insecticides and Birds American Bird Conservancy would like to thank the Turner Foundation, Wallace Genetic Foundation, Jeff and Connie Woodman, Cornell Douglas Foundation and A.W. Berry Foundation for their ongoing support for American Bird Conservancy’s Pesticides Program. Written by Dr. Pierre Mineau and Cynthia Palmer Designed by Stephanie von Blackwood About the Authors Dr. Pierre Mineau began his long and distinguished scientific career studying the effects of persistent organochlorine compounds, like DDT and PCBs, on fish-eating birds. He then became responsible for the Canadian assessment of new and existing pesticides to determine their adverse impacts on wildlife. In 1994 he transitioned from regulatory reviews to full-time research on the environmental impacts of pesticides, achieving the rank of Senior Research Scientist at Environment Canada. Working with international collaborators and graduate students, he works on assessing globally the environmental footprint of pesticides. He also studies how birds are exposed to pesticides and how bird populations respond to pesticide use and agricultural practices. His work includes defining the ecological values of birds in cropland as well as estimating the incidental take of birds from various other human activities. He has written more than 100 peer-reviewed publications and has authored some 200 presentations.
    [Show full text]
  • Froggatt) (Diptera: Tephritidae
    insects Article Efficacy of Chemicals for the Potential Management of the Queensland Fruit Fly Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt) (Diptera: Tephritidae) Olivia L. Reynolds 1,2,*, Terrence J. Osborne 2 and Idris Barchia 3 1 Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation (New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Charles Sturt University), Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Private Bag 4008, Narellan, NSW 2567, Australia 2 New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Biosecurity and Food Safety, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Private Bag 4008, Narellan, NSW 2567, Australia; [email protected] 3 New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Chief Scientist’s Branch, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Private Bag 4008, Narellan, NSW 2567, Australia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-246-406-200 Academic Editors: Michael J. Stout, Jeff Davis, Rodrigo Diaz and Julien M. Beuzelin Received: 2 February 2017; Accepted: 2 May 2017; Published: 9 May 2017 Abstract: This study investigated alternative in-field chemical controls against Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt). Bioassay 1 tested the mortality of adults exposed to fruit and filter paper dipped in insecticide, and the topical application of insecticide to adults/fruit. Bioassay 2 measured the mortality of adults permitted to oviposit on fruit dipped in insecticide and aged 0, 1, 3, or 5 days, plus the production of offspring. Bioassay 3 tested infested fruit sprayed with insecticide. The field bioassay trialed the mortality of adults exposed to one- and five-day insecticide residues on peaches, and subsequent offspring. Abamectin, alpha-cypermethrin, clothianidin, dimethoate (half-label rate), emamectin benzoate, fenthion (half- and full-label rate), and trichlorfon were the most efficacious in bioassay 1, across 18 tested insecticide treatments.
    [Show full text]
  • Immunosuppression in Honeybee Queens by the Neonicotinoids Thiacloprid and Clothianidin
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Immunosuppression in Honeybee Queens by the Neonicotinoids Thiacloprid and Clothianidin Received: 24 November 2016 Annely Brandt1, Katharina Grikscheit2, Reinhold Siede1, Robert Grosse2, Marina Doris Accepted: 19 May 2017 Meixner 1 & Ralph Büchler1 Published: xx xx xxxx Queen health is crucial to colony survival of honeybees, since reproduction and colony growth rely solely on the queen. Queen failure is considered a relevant cause of colony losses, yet few data exist concerning effects of environmental stressors on queens. Here we demonstrate for the first time that exposure to field-realistic concentrations of neonicotinoid pesticides can severely affect the immunocompetence of queens of western honeybees (Apis mellifera L.). In young queens exposed to thiacloprid (200 µg/l or 2000 µg/l) or clothianidin (10 µg/l or 50 µg/l), the total hemocyte number and the proportion of active, differentiated hemocytes was significantly reduced. Moreover, functional aspects of the immune defence namely the wound healing/melanisation response, as well as the antimicrobial activity of the hemolymph were impaired. Our results demonstrate that neonicotinoid insecticides can negatively affect the immunocompetence of queens, possibly leading to an impaired disease resistance capacity. Honeybees are highly eusocial insects that build colonies of several thousand individuals which contain only one fertile female, the queen1. This queen is responsible for all egg laying and brood production within the colony; consequently, her integrity and health is crucial for the colony’s performance and survival, and any impairment can result in adverse effects on colony fitness. In the worst case, if the workers are unable to replace a failing queen, the colony will perish2–4.
    [Show full text]
  • Neonicotinoid Insecticide Hydrolysis and Photolysis: Rates and Residual Toxicity
    Neonicotinoid Insecticide Hydrolysis and Photolysis: Rates and Residual Toxicity A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Stephen Anthony Todey IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE William Arnold May 2018 © Stephen Todey, 2018 ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Bill for all his help and guidance throughout this project, and Ann Fallon, who completed all the parent and product toxicity experiments. Thank you to Xun Ming at the Masonic Cancer Center (University of Minnesota – Twin Cities) who helped to develop the UPLC – MS/MS method used for this research and helped to operate the Orbitrap Velos. Thanks to undergraduates Josh and Amit for the work they helped to complete in the lab, and for all the dishes they washed. Thank you to all the members of the Arnold Lab Group for making me feel welcome and helping me throughout the process of completing my masters. Extra special thanks to Jill Kerrigan, Andrew McCabe, and Sarah Pati for their guidance in experimental design and data analysis. Finally, thank you to my parents, Francis and Marianne Todey, and Jennifer Anderson. I would not have gone this far without your help and support. Funding for this project was provided by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR). i Abstract Neonicotinoid insecticides are currently the most widely used class of insecticides worldwide, accounting for 25% of total insecticide use. They are registered in 120 countries for use on more than 140 crops. Concern has grown, however, over their widespread detection in global surface waters, soil, finished drinking water, and wastewater, and for their potential role in colony collapse disorder in honey bees.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a CEN Standardised Method for Liquid Chromatography Coupled to Accurate Mass Spectrometry
    Development of a CEN standardised method for liquid chromatography coupled to accurate mass spectrometry CONTENTS 1. Aim and scope ................................................................................................................. 2 2. Short description ................................................................................................................ 2 3. Apparatus and consumables ......................................................................................... 2 4. Chemicals ........................................................................................................................... 2 5. Procedure ........................................................................................................................... 3 5.1. Sample preparation ................................................................................................... 3 5.2. Recovery experiments for method validation ...................................................... 3 5.3. Extraction method ...................................................................................................... 3 5.4. Measurement .............................................................................................................. 3 5.5. Instrumentation and analytical conditions ............................................................ 4 5.5.1. Dionex Ultimate 3000 .......................................................................................... 4 5.5.2. QExactive Focus HESI source parameters .....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Quantification of Neonicotinoid Pesticides in Six Cultivable Fish Species from the River Owena in Nigeria and a Template For
    water Article Quantification of Neonicotinoid Pesticides in Six Cultivable Fish Species from the River Owena in Nigeria and a Template for Food Safety Assessment Ayodeji O. Adegun 1, Thompson A. Akinnifesi 1, Isaac A. Ololade 1 , Rosa Busquets 2 , Peter S. Hooda 3 , Philip C.W. Cheung 4, Adeniyi K. Aseperi 2 and James Barker 2,* 1 Department of Chemical Sciences, Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba Akoko P.M.B. 001, Ondo State, Nigeria; [email protected] (A.O.A.); [email protected] (T.A.A.); [email protected] (I.A.O.) 2 School of Life Sciences, Pharmacy and Chemistry, Kingston University, Kingston-upon-Thames KT1 2EE, UK; [email protected] (R.B.); [email protected] (A.K.A.) 3 School of Engineering and the Environment, Kingston University, Kingston-on-Thames KT1 2EE, UK; [email protected] 4 Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 17 June 2020; Accepted: 24 August 2020; Published: 28 August 2020 Abstract: The Owena River Basin in Nigeria is an area of agricultural importance for the production of cocoa. To optimise crop yield, the cocoa trees require spraying with neonicotinoid insecticides (Imidacloprid, Thiacloprid Acetamiprid and Thiamethoxam). It is proposed that rainwater runoff from the treated area may pollute the Owena River and that these pesticides may thereby enter the human food chain via six species of fish (Clarias gariepinus, Clarias anguillaris, Sarotherodon galilaeus, Parachanna obscura, Oreochromis niloticus and Gymnarchus niloticus) which are cultured in the river mostly for local consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Toxicity, Sublethal and Low Dose Effects of Imidacloprid and Deltamethrin on the Aphidophagous Predator Ceratomegilla Undecimnotata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae)
    insects Article Toxicity, Sublethal and Low Dose Effects of Imidacloprid and Deltamethrin on the Aphidophagous Predator Ceratomegilla undecimnotata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) Panagiotis J. Skouras 1,* , Anastasios I. Darras 2 , Marina Mprokaki 1, Vasilios Demopoulos 3, John T. Margaritopoulos 4 , Costas Delis 2 and George J. Stathas 1 1 Laboratory of Agricultural Entomology and Zoology, Department of Agriculture, Kalamata Campus, University of the Peloponnese, 24100 Antikalamos, Greece; [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (G.J.S.) 2 Department of Agriculture, Kalamata Campus, University of the Peloponnese, 24100 Antikalamos, Greece; [email protected] (A.I.D.); [email protected] (C.D.) 3 Laboratory of Plant Protection, Department of Agriculture, Kalamata Campus, University of the Peloponnese, 24100 Antikalamos, Greece; [email protected] 4 Department of Plant Protection, Institute of Industrial and Fodder Crops, Hellenic Agricultural Organization “DEMETER”—NAGREF, 38446 Volos, Greece; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +30-27210-45277 Simple Summary: Chemical insecticides are used to control agricultural pests all over the world. However, extensive use of chemical insecticides can be harmful to human health and negatively Citation: Skouras, P.J.; Darras, A.I.; impact the environment and biological control agents. We studied the toxicity and sublethal effects Mprokaki, M.; Demopoulos, V.; of imidacloprid and deltamethrin on the aphidophagous coccinellid predator Ceratomegilla
    [Show full text]
  • Toxicological Studies on Boric Acid, Imidacloprid And
    TOXICOLOGICAL STUDIES ON BORIC ACID, IMIDACLOPRID AND FIPRONIL AND THEIR BINARY MIXTURES AS INSECTICIDES ON GERMAN COCKROACH Blattellagermanica (L.) (DICTYOPTERA: BLATTELLIDAE) By FATMA SHERIF AHMED B.Sc. Agric. Sci. (Pesticides), Fac. Agric., Cairo Univ., 2007 THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE In Agricultural Sciences (Pesticides) Department of Economic Entomology and Pesticides Faculty of Agriculture Cairo University EGYPT 2015 ١ INTRODUCTION The German cockroaches, Blattellagermanica (L.), (Dictyoptera, Blattellidae) are the most common indoor pests, especially in multiple-family housing and the most significant pest in many parts of the world (Goddard, 2003). German cockroaches prefer warm, wet locations with high humidity such as kitchens, bathrooms and laundry areas. These conditions are available in several places as homes, apartments, restaurants, supermarkets, hospitals and other buildings where food are stored. Cockroaches are not only corrupt food but also transfer pathogens such as Salmonella, Shigella, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus cereus (Baumholtz et al., 1997 and Tachbeleet al., 2006). Medically important parasites such as bacteria, fungi and molds, protozoans, viruses were isolated from external and internal surface of cockroach (Brenner, 1995). Cockroaches can also transfer both gram-positive and negative bacteria (El-Sherbini and El- Sherbini, 2011). A large number of neurotoxic and non-neurotoxic insecticides were used for German cockroach control, as this pest has a considerable ability to develop resistance to a variety of chemical insecticides(Cochran, 1989 and 1995a; Scott et al., 1990; Rust and Reierson, 1991; Rust et al., 1993; Holbrook et al., 1999; Espinosa-Islas et al., 2002 and Rahayuet al., 2012).
    [Show full text]