DOCSLIB.ORG

Control of Flue-Cured Tobacco Insects with CGA-15324, N

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Control of Flue-Cured Tobacco Insects with CGA-15324, N CONTROL OF FLUE-CURED TOBACCO INSECTS WITH CGA-l 5324, N-2596, AND OTHER INSECTICIDES’ Tobacco Science, 1978, 22-44, p. 148-151, ISSN. 0082-4523.pdf By W. J. METRIC, JR., 2. SIDDIQI. and G. B. CLARK2 - Field experiments were conducted in North Carolina during 1974-75 to evaluate the effectiveness of different dosages and formulations of 13 msecticides applied as sprays to the foliage of flue-cured tobacco for control of the tobacco budworm, Heliothis virescens (F.). tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta (L.), tobacco flea beetle, Epitrix hirtlpennis (Melsheimer). and green peach aphid, Yyzus per- SiCSe (SUlZer). Performance of the various treatments was compared wtth that of .5 lb Al/acre of methomyl SP. ln comparison with methomyl SP, supenor to similar reductions in budworm damage were obtained with CGA-15324 EC (O-(4-bromo2-chlorophenyl) O-ethyl S-propyl phosphorothioate) at .75 lb Al/acre Treatments that were consistently as effective as methomyl SP in reducing budworm damage included CGA-l 5324 EC and methomyl L at.5 lb, acephate SP and EC at 75 and .5 lb, N-2596 EC (S-(p-chlorophenyl) O-ethyl ethanephosphonodithloate) at .5 and 1 lb, and PennCepMLs * F (encapsulated methyl parathion) at 1 lb. Except for N-2596 EC at .5 lb against flea beetles and Penncap-MLS F which was not tested against hornworms. all of the treatments just mentioned were as effective as methomyl SP In reducing hornworm damage and flea beetle and aphid infestations. INTRODUCTION ticidca against the green peach aphid, M~:us pc~~ic.~ (Sulzer), and the three insects mentioned earlier. The efficacy of new experimental inxecticides applied as sprays against the tobacco budworm. Hdiothis ~irc~.scc~.s(F. ), tobacco hornworm, M~duc~ .WWI (L. ), and tobacco flea beetle, Epitri.r METHODS AND MATERIALS hirr~/~~ni.s (Melsheimer), on flue-cured tobacco was reported re- cently (1, 2). The most effective materials tested were acephate, Small-plol field experiments were conducted near Clayton, North encapsulated methyl parathion, and leptophos. Acephate and encap- Carolina during 1974-75 to evaluate the effectiveness of certain hulated methyl parathion are now rcpistered for use on tobacco. and insecticides applied with a power sprayer to ‘Coker 3 19’ flue-cured .rcscarch with lcptophos has been Jiccontinucd by the manufacturer. tobacco 1% control of artificial or natural infestations of tobacco This report presents information on the effectiveness of accphate. budworms and tobacco homworms and natural infestations of to- encapsulated methyl parathion. and certain new experimental insec- bacco flea beetles and green peach aphids. Larvae occuring naturally on artific!ally infested plants were included in the tests. The experi- ments consisted of a variable number of insecticidal treatments, a >Paper No 5667 of the Journal Senes of the North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Sfat~on, rtandard t.reatment of methomyl SP at .5 lb AL/acre, and a nontreated Ralagh. N C The use of trade names ,n thjs publrcatiora does not Knply endorsement by the check replicated three times in a randomized block design. Other Noti Carolina Agncultwal Expenment Station of the products named. nor crltlclsm of similar experimental procedures were similar to those described previously ones not mentioned (2). firofessor and Research Techrvcrans, respectrvely, Department of Entomology. North Carolma State Unwersdy Raleigh, N C. 27650 Insecticides used in the experiments were: acephate, carbaryl, Conhbubon recewed June 28, 1978 Tab. Scr XXI/. 148-757. 1976 CGA-IS?24 (O-)4-bromo-2-chlorophenyl) O-ethyl S-propyl phos- lTobmco Science 148j Tobacco Science, 1978, 22-44, p. 148-151, ISSN. 0082-4523.pdf phorothioate), chlordimeform hydrochloride, Dipel” (fkci//us fhuringivmis Berliner), DS-24465 (O,O-diethyl-O-(3.oxo-2phenyl. 2H-pyridazine-6-y]) phosphorothionate). fenitrothion. FMC-33297 (3.phenoxybenzl (i) c,is-rr-cm.,-3-(2.2.dichlorovinyl)-2.2. dimethylcyclopropanecarbowylate), MC-4044 (O,O-dimethyl-0-( 1,2, 5-thiadiazol-2-yl)phosphate), MC-9087 ( I-ethoxy-4-I l-(1.4,( I, l- dimethylethyl)phenyl)-2-nitrobutyl)benzzne), methomyl. N-2596 (S-(p-chlorophenyl)O-ethyl ethanephosphonodithioate), and Penncap-M” and -MLS’ (encapsulated methyl parathion). Carbary-NCF, Penncap-M, and acephate SP were registered formu- lations, while carbary-MIC, Penncap-MLS, and acephate EC were experimental formulations. The cisitrans ration of FMC-33297 was 2517.5 in 1974 and 40160 in 1975. RESULTS TO!XKW Bud~orm.- One-half lb Al/acre of methomyl SP reduced budworm larval infestations for 6days in Experiments 4,5,7, 10, and I2 and for 10 days in the other seven experiments (Table 1). At 3 days, N-2596 EC at 1 lb in Experiment 3 and Penncap-M F at 1 lb in Experiment 5 were superior to methomyl SP. No treatment was superior to methomyl SP at 6 days. At IO (days, acephate SP at .75 lb in Experiment 5, acephate SP at .5 lb and Penncap-MLS F at 1 lb in Experiment IO, and CGA-15324 EC’ at .75 and .5 lb and chlorodimeform hydrochloride SP at .25 lb in Experiment 12 were superior to methomyl SP. In experiment:. where methomyl SP was (Tobacco Science149) Dipel WY at .5 lb, MC-4044 EC at I lb, MC-9087 EC at 1 and .5 lb, and Penncap-M Fat 1 and .75 lb. Chlordimeform hydrochloride WP at .25 lb, FMC-33297 0.8 EC at .05 lb, and DS-24465 EC at 1, .75, and .S lb gave inferior to no control. Carbaryl-NCFand -MIC WP at I lb, MC-4044ECat.5Ib,andFMC-33297 WPand3.2ECat .I. ,075, .05, and ,025 lb were ineffective in reducing damage. Tohur~~~ Hornw~mn: Methomyl SP at .5 lb AI/acre reduced homworm larval infestations for 6 days in Experiment 2 and for 10 days in the other four experiments (Table 2). The other treatments also lowered the infestations. Treatments effective at 10 days in Experiment 2 were acephate SP at .75 and .5 lb and 2.67 EC at .S lb. No treatment was superior to methomyl SP in reducing infestations 3 or 6 day< after application. Treatments superior to methomyl SP at 10 days wer2 carbaryl-MIC WP and MC-9087 EC at I lb and acephate SP at .75# Ih. Compared with methomyl SP 3, 6, and 10 days after application, \uperiur to similar control of homworm larvae w’as obtained with MC-9087 EC and carbaryl-MIC WP at 1 lb and acephate SP at .75 lb. Similar control M as provided by fenitrothion EC and MC-9087 EC at 2 lb, carharyl-NCF WP and MC-4044 EC at 1 lb. N-2596 EC at 1 and Tobacco Science, 1978, 22-44, p. 148-151, ISSN. 0082-4523.pdf .5 lb, CGA-15324 EC at .75 and .5 lb, acephate 2.67 EC at .75 lb. Dipel WF’and methomyl L at .5 lb, FMC-33297 WPand 0.8 EC at .05 lb, and FMC33297 3.2 EC at ,075, .05, and ,025 lb. Similar to inferior c.ontrol was obtained with Penncap-M F at 1 and .75 lb, OS24465 EC at I, .75, and .5 lb. MC-4044 EC and acephate SP and 2.67 EC at .5 lb, and chlordimeform hydrochloride WP at .25 lb. Methonyl SP provided excellent control (97.99%) of homworm damage f,<j,r12 days in all five experiments. The other treatments also lowered <damage. Treatments similar to methomyl SP in reducing damage wcrc MC-9087 EC at 2 and I lb, MC-4044 EC and carbary-NCF and -MIC WP at I lb, acephate SP and 2.67 EC and CGA 15-124 EC at .75 and .5 lb, methomyl L and Dipel WP at .S lb, FMC-33;!97 WP and .08 EC at .05 lb, FMC-33297 3.2 EC at ,075, .05, and .025 lb, N-2596 EC and DS-24465 EC at 1 and .5 lb. and fenitrothi~.)n EC at 2 lb. The remaining treatments reduced damage greatly but were inferior to methomyl SP. These treatments included MC-4044 EC at 5 lb, Penncap-M F at I and .75 lb,DS-24465 EC at 75 lb. and chlordimeform hydrochloride WP at .25 lb. Tohtrr ( o F’lctr R~ctle: Methomyl SP at .5 lb AI/acre reduced adult flea beetlc infestations for 10 days in Experiment 6,6 days in Experi- ineffective at 10 days, treatments effective at IO days were: acephate SP at .75 lb in Experiments 5 and 7; acephate SP at .5 lb and 2.5 EC at .5 and .25 lb, Penncap-M and MLS at I lb. and methomyl L at .S lb in Experiment 10; and CGA-15324 EC at .75 and .5 lb and chlordime- form hydrochloride SP at .25 lb in Experiment 12. Treatments that did not significantly reduce budworm larval infes- tations at any time were MC-9087 EC at I and .5 lb. Compared with methomyl SP 3, 6, and 10 days after application. superior to similar .control of larvae was provided by acephate SP at .75 lb and CGA- 15324 EC at .75 and .5 lb. Similar control was obtained with methomyl L at .5 lb and FMC-33297 0.8 EC at I lb. Similar to inferior control was provided by the remaining treatments. Methomyl SPprovided poor to good control (52.85%) of budworm damage for 12 days in all 12 experiments. The mean level of control (69%) was fair. In comparison w*ith methomyl SP treatments and the checks, superior to similar control of damage was obtained with CGA-15324 EC at .75 lb. Similar protection was provided by acephate SP and 2.5 and 2.67 EC at .75, .S, and .25 lb, methomyl L and CGA- 15324 EC at .5 lb, N-2596 EC at I and .5 lb.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ACEPHATE (Addendum)
    3 ACEPHATE (addendum) First draft prepared by Professor P.K. Gupta 1 and Dr Angelo Moretto 2 1 Rajinder Nagar, Bareilly, UP, India; 2 Dipartimento Medicina Ambientale e Sanità Pubblica, Università di Padova, Padova, Italy Explanation..........................................................................................................3 Evaluation for acceptable daily intake.................................................................4 Biochemical aspects ......................................................................................4 Oral absorption, distribution, excretion and metabolism .......................4 Toxicological studies.....................................................................................5 Acute toxicity.........................................................................................5 Short-term studies of toxicity.................................................................6 Special studies........................................................................................7 Studies on inhibition of cholinesterase activity in vitro ..................7 Short-term study of neurotoxicity ...................................................7 Developmental neurotoxicity..........................................................9 Observations in humans ..............................................................................10 Comments..........................................................................................................12 Toxicological evaluation ...................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • The Spruce Budworm, Choristoneura Fumiferana
    02-01370 Spruce Budworm Bro 10/10/02 11:09 AM Page 1 MORE INFORMATION The he spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana For more information on Spruce Budworms call: The Tree Line Spruce (Clemens), is the most destructive and widely (204) 945-7866. Or write: Budworm distributed forest defoliator in North America. Manitoba Conservation Forestry Branch In Manitoba T Forest Health and Ecology The destructive phase of this pest is the larval or caterpillar 200 Saulteaux Crescent Winnipeg, Manitoba R3J 3W3 stage. Massive budworm outbreaks occur periodically, Web site: www.gov.mb.ca/natres/forestry/ destroying hundreds of thousands of hectares of valuable fir and spruce. Aerial view of budworm damage In eastern Canada the budworm’s preferred food is balsam fir, Photos courtesy of Canadian Forest Service, Great Lakes Forest Research Centre, white spruce and red spruce. In Manitoba, the budworm Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario and Northern Forest Research Centre, Edmonton, Alberta. feeds primarily on white spruce and balsam fir, and, less frequently, on black spruce. 02-01370 Spruce Budworm Bro 10/10/02 11:09 AM Page 2 DESCRIPTION OF LIFE STAGES LIFE CYCLE DAMAGE CONTROL The adult moth has a wingspread of The female moth lays In light and moderate infestations Various insecticides are used 21 to 30 mm. It is grey-brown in its eggs in July on the damage is restricted to a partial against the spruce budworm to colour with silvery white patches on underside of needles. loss of new foliage, particularly in protect valuable spruce and fir the forewings. Normally, the eggs the upper crown trees.
    [Show full text]
  • Lifetime Organophosphorous Insecticide Use Among Private Pesticide Applicators in the Agricultural Health Study
    Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2012) 22, 584 -- 592 & 2012 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved 1559-0631/12 www.nature.com/jes ORIGINAL ARTICLE Lifetime organophosphorous insecticide use among private pesticide applicators in the Agricultural Health Study Jane A. Hoppin1, Stuart Long2, David M. Umbach3, Jay H. Lubin4, Sarah E. Starks5, Fred Gerr5, Kent Thomas6, Cynthia J. Hines7, Scott Weichenthal8, Freya Kamel1, Stella Koutros9, Michael Alavanja9, Laura E. Beane Freeman9 and Dale P. Sandler1 Organophosphorous insecticides (OPs) are the most commonly used insecticides in US agriculture, but little information is available regarding specific OP use by individual farmers. We describe OP use for licensed private pesticide applicators from Iowa and North Carolina in the Agricultural Health Study (AHS) using lifetime pesticide use data from 701 randomly selected male participants collected at three time periods. Of 27 OPs studied, 20 were used by 41%. Overall, 95% had ever applied at least one OP. The median number of different OPs used was 4 (maximum ¼ 13). Malathion was the most commonly used OP (74%) followed by chlorpyrifos (54%). OP use declined over time. At the first interview (1993--1997), 68% of participants had applied OPs in the past year; by the last interview (2005--2007), only 42% had. Similarly, median annual application days of OPs declined from 13.5 to 6 days. Although OP use was common, the specific OPs used varied by state, time period, and individual. Much of the variability in OP use was associated with the choice of OP, rather than the frequency or duration of application.
    [Show full text]
  • Malathion Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report
    SERA TR-052-02-02c Malathion Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report Submitted to: Paul Mistretta, COR USDA/Forest Service, Southern Region 1720 Peachtree RD, NW Atlanta, Georgia 30309 USDA Forest Service Contract: AG-3187-C-06-0010 USDA Forest Order Number: AG-43ZP-D-06-0012 SERA Internal Task No. 52-02 Submitted by: Patrick R. Durkin Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. 5100 Highbridge St., 42C Fayetteville, New York 13066-0950 Fax: (315) 637-0445 E-Mail: [email protected] Home Page: www.sera-inc.com May 12, 2008 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ ii List of Figures................................................................................................................................. v List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................... vi List of Attachments........................................................................................................................ vi ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ............................................................... vii COMMON UNIT CONVERSIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS.................................................... x CONVERSION OF SCIENTIFIC NOTATION ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Consequences of Linguistic Uncertainty for Insect Management
    WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE Consequences of Linguistic Uncertainty for Insect Management THERESA M. CIRA, KATHY QUICK, AND ROBERT C. VENETTE JA'CRISPY/ISTOCK 258 AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGIST | WINTER 2019 his is a call to entomologists to consider the un- certainty introduced into our works through the language we use. Albert Einstein remarked, “Every- thing depends on the degree to which words and word-combinations correspond to the world of im- Tpression,” which makes language a “dangerous source of error and deception” (Hawking 2007). Scientists usually research and deliberately choose the language they use to propose new concepts or terminology. Often, however, terms slip into the lexicon through less systematic means. Words may seem to have meanings so obvious that broad understanding of the term may be taken for granted, but individual contexts are diverse, and to assume that a word’s meaning is unchanging across time and space is to overlook the uncertainties of lan- guage. Thus, communication through even the most common entomological vocabulary can fail. Language is a mutable, un- certain, and imperfect way of representing the world. Because language is integral to science and yet inherently imprecise, it is important for scientists to recognize and address uncertain- ty in the language of our works. Uncertainty, as defined by the Society a phenomenon is repeatedly observed and for Risk Analysis (2015), is “not knowing the individuals agree that measurements con- true value of a quantity or the future con- verge, to some degree, on a specific point, sequences of an activity,” or “imperfect or more certainty about the true nature of the incomplete information/knowledge about phenomenon can be asserted.
    [Show full text]
  • Table II. EPCRA Section 313 Chemical List for Reporting Year 2017 (Including Toxic Chemical Categories)
    Table II. EPCRA Section 313 Chemical List For Reporting Year 2017 (including Toxic Chemical Categories) Individually listed EPCRA Section 313 chemicals with CAS numbers are arranged alphabetically starting on page II-3. Following the alphabetical list, the EPCRA Section 313 chemicals are arranged in CAS number order. Covered chemical categories follow. Note: Chemicals may be added to or deleted from the list. The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Call Center or the TRI-Listed Chemicals website will provide up-to-date information on the status of these changes. See section B.3.c of the instructions for more information on the de minimis % limits listed below. There are no de minimis levels for PBT chemicals since the de minimis exemption is not available for these chemicals (an asterisk appears where a de minimis limit would otherwise appear in Table II). However, for purposes of the supplier notification requirement only, such limits are provided in Appendix C. Chemical Qualifiers Certain EPCRA Section 313 chemicals listed in Table II have parenthetic “qualifiers.” These qualifiers indicate that these EPCRA Section 313 chemicals are subject to the section 313 reporting requirements if manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in a specific form or when a certain activity is performed. An EPCRA Section 313 chemical that is listed without a qualifier is subject to reporting in all forms in which it is manufactured, processed, and otherwise used. The following chemicals are reportable only if they are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in the specific form(s) listed below: Chemical/ Chemical Category CAS Number Qualifier Aluminum (fume or dust) 7429-90-5 Only if it is a fume or dust form.
    [Show full text]
  • 744 Hydrolysis of Chiral Organophosphorus Compounds By
    [Frontiers in Bioscience, Landmark, 26, 744-770, Jan 1, 2021] Hydrolysis of chiral organophosphorus compounds by phosphotriesterases and mammalian paraoxonase-1 Antonio Monroy-Noyola1, Damianys Almenares-Lopez2, Eugenio Vilanova Gisbert3 1Laboratorio de Neuroproteccion, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Autonoma del Estado de Morelos, Morelos, Mexico, 2Division de Ciencias Basicas e Ingenierias, Universidad Popular de la Chontalpa, H. Cardenas, Tabasco, Mexico, 3Instituto de Bioingenieria, Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Elche, Alicante, Spain TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Abstract 2. Introduction 2.1. Organophosphorus compounds (OPs) and their toxicity 2.2. Metabolism and treatment of OP intoxication 2.3. Chiral OPs 3. Stereoselective hydrolysis 3.1. Stereoselective hydrolysis determines the toxicity of chiral compounds 3.2. Hydrolysis of nerve agents by PTEs 3.2.1. Hydrolysis of V-type agents 3.3. PON1, a protein restricted in its ability to hydrolyze chiral OPs 3.4. Toxicity and stereoselective hydrolysis of OPs in animal tissues 3.4.1. The calcium-dependent stereoselective activity of OPs associated with PON1 3.4.2. Stereoselective hydrolysis commercial OPs pesticides by alloforms of PON1 Q192R 3.4.3. PON1, an enzyme that stereoselectively hydrolyzes OP nerve agents 3.4.4. PON1 recombinants and stereoselective hydrolysis of OP nerve agents 3.5. The activity of PTEs in birds 4. Conclusions 5. Acknowledgments 6. References 1. ABSTRACT Some organophosphorus compounds interaction of the racemic OPs with these B- (OPs), which are used in the manufacturing of esterases (AChE and NTE) and such interactions insecticides and nerve agents, are racemic mixtures have been studied in vivo, ex vivo and in vitro, using with at least one chiral center with a phosphorus stereoselective hydrolysis by A-esterases or atom.
    [Show full text]
  • Organophosphate Insecticides
    CHAPTER 4 HIGHLIGHTS Organophosphate Insecticides Acts through phosphorylation of the acetylcholinesterase enzyme Since the removal of organochlorine insecticides from use, organophosphate at nerve endings insecticides have become the most widely used insecticides available today. More Absorbed by inhalation, than forty of them are currently registered for use and all run the risk of acute ingestion, and skin and subacute toxicity. Organophosphates are used in agriculture, in the home, penetration in gardens, and in veterinary practice. All apparently share a common mecha- Muscarinic, nicotinic & CNS nism of cholinesterase inhibition and can cause similar symptoms. Because they effects share this mechanism, exposure to the same organophosphate by multiple routes or to multiple organophosphates by multiple routes can lead to serious additive Signs and Symptoms: toxicity. It is important to understand, however, that there is a wide range of Headache, hypersecretion, toxicity in these agents and wide variation in cutaneous absorption, making muscle twitching, nausea, specific identification and management quite important. diarrhea Respiratory depression, seizures, loss of consciousness Toxicology Miosis is often a helpful Organophosphates poison insects and mammals primarily by phosphory- diagnostic sign lation of the acetylcholinesterase enzyme (AChE) at nerve endings. The result is a loss of available AChE so that the effector organ becomes overstimulated by Treatment: the excess acetylcholine (ACh, the impulse-transmitting substance) in the nerve Clear airway, improve tissue ending. The enzyme is critical to normal control of nerve impulse transmission oxygenation from nerve fibers to smooth and skeletal muscle cells, glandular cells, and Administer atropine sulfate autonomic ganglia, as well as within the central nervous system (CNS).
    [Show full text]
  • Parathion-Methyl
    FAO SPECIFICATIONS AND EVALUATIONS FOR PLANT PROTECTION PRODUCTS PARATHION-METHYL O,O-dimethyl O-4-nitrophenyl phosphorothioate 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS PARATHION-METHYL Page DISCLAIMER 3 INTRODUCTION 4 PART ONE 5 SPECIFICATIONS FOR PARATHION-METHYL PARATHION-METHYL INFORMATIONERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. PARATHION-METHYL TECHNICAL MATERIAL 6 PARATHION-METHYL TECHNICAL CONCENTRATE 8 PARATHION-METHYL EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE 10 PART TWO 13 2001 EVALUATION REPORT ON PARATHION-METHYL 14 Page 2 of 31 PARATHION-METHYL SPECIFICATIONS 2001 Disclaimer1 FAO specifications are developed with the basic objective of ensuring that pesticides complying with them are satisfactory for the purpose for which they are intended so that they may serve as an international point of reference. The specifications do not constitute an endorsement or warranty of the use of a particular pesticide for a particular purpose. Neither do they constitute a warranty that pesticides complying with these specifications are suitable for the control of any given pest, or for use in a particular area. Owing to the complexity of the problems involved, the suitability of pesticides for a particular application must be decided at the national or provincial level. Furthermore, the preparation and use of pesticides complying with these specifications are not exempted from any safety regulation or other legal or administrative provision applicable thereto. FAO shall not be liable for any injury, loss, damage or prejudice of any kind that may be suffered as a result of the preparation, transportation, sale or use of pesticides complying with these specifications. Additionally, FAO wishes to alert users of specifications to the fact that improper field mixing and/or application of pesticides can result in either a lowering or complete loss of efficacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticides EPA 738-F-01-013 Environmental Protection and Toxic Substances September 2001 Agency (7508C)
    United States Prevention, Pesticides EPA 738-F-01-013 Environmental Protection and Toxic Substances September 2001 Agency (7508C) Acephate Facts EPA has assessed the risks of acephate and reached an Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision (IRED) for this organophosphate (OP) pesticide. Provided that risk mitigation measures are adopted, acephate fits into its own “risk cup”-- its individual, aggregate risks are within acceptable levels. Acephate also is eligible for reregistration, pending a full reassessment of the cumulative risk from all OPs. Acephate residues in food and drinking water do not pose risk concerns, and by reducing exposure The OP Pilot Public Participation Process in homes and through residential lawns, acephate fits The organophosphates are a group of into its own “risk cup.” EPA made this related pesticides that affect the functioning of the determination after the registrants agreed to drop nervous system. They are among EPA’s highest indoor residential uses and certain turf uses. With priority for review under the Food Quality other mitigation measures, acephate’s worker and Protection Act. ecological risks also will be below levels of concern EPA is encouraging the public to participate in the review of the OP pesticides. for reregistration. Through a six-phased pilot public participation process, the Agency is releasing for review and EPA’s next step under the Food Quality comment its preliminary and revised scientific risk Protection Act (FQPA) is to consider risks from assessments for individual OPs. (Please contact cumulative exposure to all the OP pesticides, which the OP Docket, telephone 703-305-5805, or see EPA’s web site, www.epa.gov/pesticides/op .) share a common mechanism of toxicity.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Health Criteria 63 ORGANOPHOSPHORUS
    Environmental Health Criteria 63 ORGANOPHOSPHORUS INSECTICIDES: A GENERAL INTRODUCTION Please note that the layout and pagination of this web version are not identical with the printed version. Organophophorus insecticides: a general introduction (EHC 63, 1986) INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMME ON CHEMICAL SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CRITERIA 63 ORGANOPHOSPHORUS INSECTICIDES: A GENERAL INTRODUCTION This report contains the collective views of an international group of experts and does not necessarily represent the decisions or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, or the World Health Organization. Published under the joint sponsorship of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, and the World Health Organization World Health Orgnization Geneva, 1986 The International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) is a joint venture of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, and the World Health Organization. The main objective of the IPCS is to carry out and disseminate evaluations of the effects of chemicals on human health and the quality of the environment. Supporting activities include the development of epidemiological, experimental laboratory, and risk-assessment methods that could produce internationally comparable results, and the development of manpower in the field of toxicology. Other activities carried out by the IPCS include the development of know-how for coping with chemical accidents, coordination
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 Theinternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) Was Established in 1980
    The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 cation Hazard of Pesticides by and Guidelines to Classi The WHO Recommended Classi The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 TheInternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) was established in 1980. The overall objectives of the IPCS are to establish the scientific basis for assessment of the risk to human health and the environment from exposure to chemicals, through international peer review processes, as a prerequisite for the promotion of chemical safety, and to provide technical assistance in strengthening national capacities for the sound management of chemicals. This publication was developed in the IOMC context. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or stated policies of individual IOMC Participating Organizations. The Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) was established in 1995 following recommendations made by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to strengthen cooperation and increase international coordination in the field of chemical safety. The Participating Organizations are: FAO, ILO, UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO, UNITAR, WHO, World Bank and OECD. The purpose of the IOMC is to promote coordination of the policies and activities pursued by the Participating Organizations, jointly or separately, to achieve the sound management of chemicals in relation to human health and the environment. WHO recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification, 2019 edition ISBN 978-92-4-000566-2 (electronic version) ISBN 978-92-4-000567-9 (print version) ISSN 1684-1042 © World Health Organization 2020 Some rights reserved.
    [Show full text]