DOCSLIB.ORG

Managing Pesticide Residue Levels of Michigan Apples and Cherries to Meet Global Mrls

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Managing Pesticide Residue Levels of Michigan Apples and Cherries to Meet Global Mrls MANAGING PESTICIDE RESIDUE LEVELS OF MICHIGAN APPLES AND CHERRIES TO MEET GLOBAL MRLS By Anthony Hale VanWoerkom A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Entomology—Doctor of Philosophy 2017 ABSTRACT MANAGING PESTICIDE RESIDUE LEVELS OF MICHIGAN APPLES AND CHERRIES TO MEET GLOBAL MRLS By Anthony Hale VanWoerkom Profitability in global food markets requires meeting high food quality sanitary and phytosanitary standards, often through the judicious use of crop protection materials, including pesticides. At the same time, many export market targets for US fruit crops set standards for maximum pesticide residue limits (MRLs) that are often lower than the domestic tolerances held by the USEPA. Meeting this challenge is especially difficult with the recent prevalence of late season invasive pests, like the Brown Marmorated Stink Bug (Halyomorpha Halys) (Stal) (BMSB) and Spotted Wing Drosophila (Drosophila suzukii) (SWD). Fruit growers need more data to determine which compounds hold the highest risks of rejection for export-bound crops. These data will also support establishment of “Export PHIs” guides that growers can use to avoid load rejections from export-target countries. Treatment regimens with minimum and maximum seasonal applications, addition of adjuvants, and the use of post-harvest water rinsing were tested for their effects on residue levels at harvest. Dedicated to my wife Rachel and daughter Charlotte VanWoerkom iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people I would like to thank for the completion of my dissertation and Doctoral Degree. I would first like to thank my advisor, John Wise for the exciting opportunity and encouragement. I thank my committee members, Mark Whalon, Dan Kunkel, and Larry Gut for their advice and guidance. I would also like to thank Chris Vandervoort and Tom Garavaglia for their hard work analyzing the residue samples. Thank you to my lab mates Charlie and Jen Coslor for their field, lab, and statistical analysis assistance. Thanks to the staff of Trevor Nichols Research Center in Fennville Michigan for the great maintenance of the facility. A big thanks to my colleague Celeste Wheeler, Ignatius Andika, and the Mark Whalon lab for the residue sample collecting and processing assistance. Thanks to the USDA Specialty Crop Block Grant – Strategic Growth initiative, and the Michigan Apple Committee & Michigan Cherry Committee in which funding was provided for this research. A special thanks to my wife Rachel for her patience and encouragement. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... ix KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................ xii CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................. 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 Importance of Global MRLs to Specialty Crop Industries ............................................. 4 Pesticide Degradation and MRL Calculation .............................................................. 6 Influences and Challenges of Risk Assessment with MRL Establishments ................ 8 Managing MRL Risks for Apples and Cherries ......................................................... 10 Influences of Multiple Applications on Residues at Harvest ..................................... 11 The Influences of Fruit Washing on Pesticide Residues Post Harvest ..................... 11 Influence of Adjuvants on Residues at Harvest ........................................................ 15 Influences of Insecticide Penetration on Residues at Harvest .................................. 17 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 19 CHAPTER 2: INFLUENCE OF SINGLE AND MULTIPLE INSECTICIDE APPLICATIONS ON RESIDUES AT HARVEST AND ASSOCIATED RISK FOR APPLE EXPORTS .................................................................................................... 21 Abstract .................................................................................................................... 21 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 22 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................. 26 Field Plots-2014 and 2015 Seasons .................................................................... 26 Applications-2014 Season ................................................................................... 27 Applications-2015 Season ................................................................................... 28 Sample Collection-2014 and 2015 Seasons ....................................................... 29 Sample Processing-2014 and 2015 Seasons ..................................................... 30 Homogenization Procedures-2014 and 2015 Seasons ....................................... 31 Sample Extraction-2014 and 2015 Seasons ....................................................... 32 Results ..................................................................................................................... 35 Residue Profiles-2014 Single Application ............................................................ 35 Residue Profiles-2015 Single and Multiple Applications ...................................... 38 Discussion ................................................................................................................ 44 CHAPTER 3: INFLUENCE OF POST HARVEST WATER WASHING AND MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS ON INSECTICIDE RESIDUES AT HARVEST AND ASSOCIATED RISK FOR CHERRY EXPORTS ...................................................... 50 Abstract .................................................................................................................... 50 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 51 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................. 56 Field Plots-2014 Season ..................................................................................... 56 Field Plots-2015 Season ..................................................................................... 56 v Applications-2014 Season ................................................................................... 57 Applications-2015 Season ................................................................................... 58 Sample Collection-2014 and 2015 Seasons ....................................................... 59 Cherry Washing-2014 and 2015 Seasons ........................................................... 60 Homogenization Procedures-2014 and 2015 Seasons ....................................... 62 Sample Extraction-2014 and 2015 Seasons ....................................................... 63 Results ..................................................................................................................... 65 Residue Profiles-2014 Washed and Unwashed Cherries .................................... 65 Residue Profiles-2015 Single and Multiple Applications ...................................... 70 Discussion ................................................................................................................ 75 CHAPTER 4: INFLUENCE OF ADJUVANTS ON INSECTICIDE RESIDUES AND SURFACE PENETRATION AT HARVEST AND ASSOCIATED RISK FOR APPLE AND CHERRY EXPORTS ........................................................................... 83 Abstract .................................................................................................................... 83 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 85 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................. 91 Field Plots-Apple ................................................................................................. 91 Field Plots-Cherry ................................................................................................ 92 Applications-Apple ............................................................................................... 92 Applications-Cherry ............................................................................................. 94 Sample Collection-Apple ..................................................................................... 96 Sample Collection-Cherry ................................................................................... 98 Cherry Washing ................................................................................................... 98 Sample Processing-Apple ................................................................................. 100 Homogenization Procedures-Apple and Cherry ................................................ 101 Fruit Penetration Profiling Dissection-Apple ...................................................... 102 Fruit Penetration Profiling Dissection-Cherry ...................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Adsorption and Degradation of Three Pesticides in a Vineyard Soil and in an Organic Biomix
    environments Article Adsorption and Degradation of Three Pesticides in a Vineyard Soil and in an Organic Biomix Costantino Vischetti 1,*, Elga Monaci 1, Cristiano Casucci 1, Arianna De Bernardi 1 and Alessandra Cardinali 2 1 Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Marche Polytechnic University, via Brecce Bianche 10, 60131 Ancona, Italy; e.monaci@staff.univpm.it (E.M.); c.casucci@staff.univpm.it (C.C.); [email protected] (A.D.B.) 2 Department of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and the Environment, University of Padova, viale dell’Università 16, 35020 Legnaro, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: c.vischetti@staff.univpm.it; Tel.: +39-071-2204264 Received: 5 November 2020; Accepted: 14 December 2020; Published: 16 December 2020 Abstract: A soil and an organic biomix (soil/vine branch/garden compost 20/40/40) were used in this lab experiment to evaluate adsorption and degradation parameters for three pesticides (chlorpyrifos, metalaxyl and cymoxanil) used in a vineyard. Adsorption in the biomix material was higher than in the soil for the three pesticides and chlorpyrifos was the most adsorbed pesticide. The role of the organic carbon is essential for enhancing the adsortion of the three pesticides, especially for the most apolar chlorpyrifos. Degradation was generally faster in the biomix material than in the soil although the process was slower in the case of chlorpyrifos if compared with the other two chemicals, due to a more toxic effect of this pesticide on soil microflora and a larger adsorption of this pesticide on the organic biomix that reduces its availability for dissipation.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6: Additional WPS Training Topics for Handlers
    ADDITIONAL WPS TRAINING TOPICS FOR HANDLERS CHAPTER Pesticide Labels 6-1 Contents 6-1: Reading and Understanding the Pesticide Label ............................70 The Parts of the Pesticide Label .......................................................................71 Brand Name ...................................................................................................74 Pesticide Manufacturer ................................................................................74 Pesticide Type ................................................................................................75 Active Ingredient ...........................................................................................75 Inert or Other Ingredients .............................................................................75 Pesticide Formulation ....................................................................................76 Table 6.1: Examples of Different Types of Pesticide Formulations ............76 EPA Registration Number ..............................................................................76 Signal Word ....................................................................................................77 First Aid ...........................................................................................................77 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) ..........................................................78 Precautionary Statements ............................................................................78 Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management
    sustainability Review A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management Lauren Brzozowski 1 and Michael Mazourek 1,2,* ID 1 Section of Plant Breeding and Genetics, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA; [email protected] 2 David R. Atkinson Center for Sustainable Future, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 21 April 2018; Accepted: 11 June 2018; Published: 15 June 2018 Abstract: The need to improve agricultural sustainability to secure yields, minimize environmental impacts and buffer environmental change is widely recognized. Investment in conventional agriculture has supported its present yield advantage. However, organic agriculture with agroecological management has nascent capacity for sustainable production and for increasing yields in the future. Conventional systems have leveraged reductionist approaches to address pests, primarily through pesticides that seek to eliminate biological factors that reduce yield, but come at a cost to human and ecosystem health, and leave production systems vulnerable to the development of pest resistance to these chemicals or traits. Alternatives are needed, and are found in organic production approaches. Although both organic and agroecology approaches encompass more than pest management, this aspect is a pivotal element of our agricultural future. Through increased investment and application of emerging analytical approaches to improve plant breeding for and management of these systems, yields and resilience will surpass approaches that address components alone. Keywords: organic agriculture; agroecology; pest management; plant breeding; biodiversity; sustainability; host plant resistance; pesticides 1. Achieving Needs for Agricultural Productivity and Pest Management Sustainably There is broad recognition among agricultural scientists that a growing world population will consume greater amounts of food and fiber with fewer resources available for production [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Material Safety Data Sheet
    Material Safety Data Sheet DANITOL 2.4 EC (WARNING Statement) This Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) serves different purposes than and DOES NOT REPLACE OR MODIFY THE EPA-APPROVED PRODUCT LABELING (attached to and accompanying the product container). This MSDS provides important health, safety, and environmental information for employers, employees, emergency responders and others handling large quantities of the product in activities generally other than product use, while the labeling provides that information specifically for product use in the ordinary course. Use, storage and disposal of pesticide products is regulated by the EPA under the authority of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) through the product labeling. All necessary and appropriate precautionary, use, and storage, and disposal information is set forth on that labeling. It is a violation of federal law to use a pesticide product in any manner not prescribed on the EPA-approved label. 1. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION PRODUCT NAME: DANITOL 2.4 EC (WARNING Statement) VC NUMBER(S): 1237 & 1238 & 1340 ITEM: 69625 SYNONYM(S): None EPA REGISTRATION NUMBER: 59639-35 MANUFACTURER/DISTRIBUTOR EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS VALENT U.S.A. CORPORATION HEALTH EMERGENCY OR SPILL (24 hr): P.O. Box 8025 (800) 892-0099 1600 Riviera Avenue, Suite 200 TRANSPORTATION (24 hr.): CHEMTREC Walnut Creek, CA 94596-8025. (800) 424-9300 or (202) 483-7616. PRODUCT INFORMATION AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS: (800) 682-5368 PROFESSIONAL PRODUCTS: (800) 898-2536 The current MSDS is available through our website or by calling the product information numbers listed above. (www.valent.com) 2. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS Chemical Name Weight/ ACGIH Exposure Limits OSHA Exposure Limits Manufacturer's Exposure Percent Limits Fenpropathrin (alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl 30 - 32 None.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticide Resistance Management an Insect Perspective
    PesticidePesticide ResistanceResistance ManagementManagement AnAn InsectInsect PerspectivePerspective FrankFrank Zalom,Zalom, Dept.Dept. ofof Entomology,Entomology, UCUC DavisDavis NickNick Toscano,Toscano, DeptDept ofof Entomology,Entomology, UCUC RiversideRiverside FrankFrank Byrne,Byrne, DeptDept ofof Entomology,Entomology, UCUC RiversideRiverside InsecticideInsecticide resistanceresistance isis duedue toto aa geneticgenetic traittrait aa pestpest inheritsinherits thatthat allowsallows itit toto survivesurvive anan applicationapplication thatthat mostmost otherother individualsindividuals inin thethe populationpopulation cannotcannot survive.survive. TheThe survivorsurvivor thenthen passespasses thethe genesgenes forfor resistanceresistance onon toto thethe nextnext generation.generation. X TheThe moremore thethe insecticideinsecticide isis used,used, thethe moremore quicklyquickly susceptiblesusceptible individualsindividuals areare eliminatedeliminated andand thethe fasterfaster thethe proportionproportion ofof resistantresistant individualsindividuals increasesincreases inin thethe population.population. X X X X X X IncreasingIncreasing pesticidepesticide ratesrates ResistanceResistance MechanismsMechanisms InsecticideInsecticide avoidanceavoidance behaviorsbehaviors -- • InsectsInsects maymay changechange theirtheir behaviorbehavior inin orderorder toto avoidavoid thethe pesticide.pesticide. BiochemicalBiochemical mechanismsmechanisms -- • ResistantResistant insectsinsects possesposses enzymesenzymes thatthat breakbreak downdown
    [Show full text]
  • INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES
    US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES Note: Pesticide tolerance information is updated in the Code of Federal Regulations on a weekly basis. EPA plans to update these indexes biannually. These indexes are current as of the date indicated in the pdf file. For the latest information on pesticide tolerances, please check the electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/40cfrv23_07.html 1 40 CFR Type Family Common name CAS Number PC code 180.163 Acaricide bridged diphenyl Dicofol (1,1-Bis(chlorophenyl)-2,2,2-trichloroethanol) 115-32-2 10501 180.198 Acaricide phosphonate Trichlorfon 52-68-6 57901 180.259 Acaricide sulfite ester Propargite 2312-35-8 97601 180.446 Acaricide tetrazine Clofentezine 74115-24-5 125501 180.448 Acaricide thiazolidine Hexythiazox 78587-05-0 128849 180.517 Acaricide phenylpyrazole Fipronil 120068-37-3 129121 180.566 Acaricide pyrazole Fenpyroximate 134098-61-6 129131 180.572 Acaricide carbazate Bifenazate 149877-41-8 586 180.593 Acaricide unclassified Etoxazole 153233-91-1 107091 180.599 Acaricide unclassified Acequinocyl 57960-19-7 6329 180.341 Acaricide, fungicide dinitrophenol Dinocap (2, 4-Dinitro-6-octylphenyl crotonate and 2,6-dinitro-4- 39300-45-3 36001 octylphenyl crotonate} 180.111 Acaricide, insecticide organophosphorus Malathion 121-75-5 57701 180.182 Acaricide, insecticide cyclodiene Endosulfan 115-29-7 79401
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Pesticide Drift1 F
    PI232 Managing Pesticide Drift1 F. M. Fishel and J. A. Ferrell2 Introduction may drift and whether it is harmful depends on interrelated factors that can be complex. The drift of spray from pesticide applications can expose people, plants and animals, and the environment to Drift is a significant legal concern in Florida. During pesticide residues that can cause health and environmental 2009–2010, the Florida Department of Agriculture and effects and property damage. Agricultural practices are Consumer Services (FDACS), which is the state pesticide poorly understood by the public, which causes anxiety and regulatory agency, initiated 39 investigations in response sometimes overreaction to a situation. Even the application to allegations of drift. Where significant drift does occur, of fertilizers or biological pesticides, like Bt or pheromones, it can damage or contaminate sensitive crops, poison bees, can be perceived as a danger to the general public. Drift pose health risks to humans and animals, and contaminate can lead to litigation, financially damaging court costs, soil and water in adjacent areas (Figure 1). Applicators are and appeals to restrict or ban the use of crop protection legally responsible for the damages resulting from the off- materials. Urbanization has led to much of Florida’s agri- target movement of pesticides. It is impossible to eliminate cultural production being in areas of close proximity to the drift totally, but it is possible to reduce it to a legal level. general public, including residential subdivisions, assisted The purpose of this guide is to discuss factors influencing living facilities, hospitals, and schools. Such sensitive sites drift and provide common-sense solutions for minimizing heighten the need for drift mitigation measures to be taken potential drift problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Planting Covers on Herbicide Persistence in Landscape Soils
    Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 2775-2779 Geological Survey (USGS) have shown that 99% of the tested Effect of Planting Covers on urban streams contain at least one pesticide, with 70% con- Herbicide Persistence in Landscape taining five or more pesticides (3). The presence of pesticides at trace levels may cause short- or long-term impairments Soils to aquatic ecosystems, such as toxicity (insecticides) or phytotoxicity (herbicides) (4, 5). To protect water quality, ,² ² ³ regulations such as Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) J. GAN,* Y. ZHU, C. WILEN, are being developed for many surface waterbodies in the D. PITTENGER,§ AND D. CROWLEY² United States (6). Department of Environmental Sciences and Department of Source analysis and monitoring studies have shown that Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, movement of pesticides from residential areas is mainly Riverside, California 92521, and University of California associated with stormwater runoff (6-8). For instance, storm Statewide Integrated Pest Management Program and flow constitutes about 80% of the water discharged to the UC Cooperative Extension, San Diego, California 92123 Newport Bay in Orange County, CA (6). In the San Diego Creek, which serves as the main drainage channel to Newport Bay, the median diazinon (445 ng L-1) and chlorpyrifos (87 -1 Recent monitoring shows that the majority of urban ng L ) concentrations in storm flow are higher than or similar -1 streams in the United States are contaminated by pesticide to those in the base flow (200 ng L for diazinon and 111 ng L-1 for chlorpyrifos). Thus, the overwhelming majority of residues, and the contamination is mainly due to runoff the pesticide load in the San Diego Creek derives from storm from residential landscapes.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.MECHANISMS and STRATEGIES for PESTICIDE
    Revista Internacional de Contaminación Ambiental ISSN: 0188-4999 [email protected] Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México México ORTIZ-HERNÁNDEZ, Ma. Laura; SÁNCHEZ-SALINAS, Enrique; CASTREJÓN GODÍNEZ, María Luisa; DANTAN GONZÁLEZ, Edgar; POPOCA URSINO, Elida Carolina MECHANISMS AND STRATEGIES FOR PESTICIDE BIODEGRADATION: OPPORTUNITY FOR WASTE, SOILS AND WATER CLEANING Revista Internacional de Contaminación Ambiental, vol. 29, septiembre, 2013, pp. 85-104 Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Distrito Federal, México Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=37028958005 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Rev. Int. Contam. Ambie. 29 (Número especial sobre plaguicidas) 85-104 Septiembre 2013 MECHANISMS AND STRATEGIES FOR PESTICIDE BIODEGRADATION: OPPORTUNITY FOR WASTE, SOILS AND WATER CLEANING Ma. Laura ORTIZ-HERNÁNDEZ1*, Enrique SÁNCHEZ-SALINAS1, María Luisa CASTREJÓN GODÍNEZ2, Edgar DANTAN GONZÁLEZ3 y Elida Carolina POPOCA URSINO3 1 Centro de Investigación en Biotecnología, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos 2 Programa de Gestión Ambiental Universitario, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos 3 Centro de Investigación en Biotecnología, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos * Autora responsable: [email protected] (Recibido julio 2013, aceptado agosto 2013) Key words: pesticide, biodegradation, biobeds, cells immobilization ABSTRACT Pesticides are substances or mixtures of substances intended to prevent, destroy or con- trol any pest, and they are widely used mainly in agriculture, industry and the domestic sector. These compounds have been extensively used for decades and have significantly increased food production.
    [Show full text]
  • Sound Management of Pesticides and Diagnosis and Treatment Of
    * Revision of the“IPCS - Multilevel Course on the Safe Use of Pesticides and on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Presticide Poisoning, 1994” © World Health Organization 2006 All rights reserved. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use. CONTENTS Preface Acknowledgement Part I. Overview 1. Introduction 1.1 Background 1.2 Objectives 2. Overview of the resource tool 2.1 Moduledescription 2.2 Training levels 2.3 Visual aids 2.4 Informationsources 3. Using the resource tool 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Training trainers 3.2.1 Organizational aspects 3.2.2 Coordinator’s preparation 3.2.3 Selection of participants 3.2.4 Before training trainers 3.2.5 Specimen module 3.3 Trainers 3.3.1 Trainer preparation 3.3.2 Selection of participants 3.3.3 Organizational aspects 3.3.4 Before a course 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Integrated Pest Management (IPM) a Science-Based Approach for Ecologically Sound Land Management
    Guide to Integrated Pest Management (IPM) A science-based approach for ecologically sound land management The first and most By Dr. Vera Krischik, important steps of IPM are and Laurie Schneider to accept that plants can University of Minnesota, handle some pest and Entomology, Jan. 2020 disease damage, and to determine your economic threshold. INSIDE: Left: Regular inspection of plants for pests and disease. • What is IPM? photo: PFA 2020 • IPM Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is an ecosystem-based approach that employs long- Implementation term prevention of pests and pest damage through monitoring of plants, pests and weather to project ahead and plan. While pesticides simply respond to the pest, IPM addresses the source of pest problems. IPM strives to avoid chemicals harmful to • Natural pollinators and toxic to the environment. Predator Guide It's important for land managers, homeowners and farmers to learn how to implement an IPM plan. Any individual or organization can adopt an IPM plan for spaces from backyards • Insecticide to public parks to farms. IPM plans should be updated annually, and staff need to be Toxicity to trained on pesticide use and best practices. Pollinators IPM promotes multiple tactics and controls to manage pests and to suppress the population size below levels that will damage the plant. Cultural controls are practices that reduce pest establishment, reproduction, Find more on IPM dispersal and survival. For example, the pest's environment can be disrupted by turning and pollinator under garden soil, mowing, sterilizing tools and harvesting early. Composting, watering, conservation at: mulching, pruning, fertilizing and ground covers can all help improve plant health, resulting ncipmhort.cfans.umn.edu in healthier plants that can tolerate some damage.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Measure for Pesticides to Reduce Contamination of Ground and Surface Water from Pesticides: 1
    Chapter 4B: Pesticide Management 4B: Pesticide Management Management Measure for Pesticides To reduce contamination of ground and surface water from pesticides: 1. Inventory pest problems, previous pest control measures, and cropping history. 2. Evaluate the soil and physical characteristics of the site including mixing, loading, and storage areas for potential leaching or runoff of pesticides. If leaching or runoff is found to occur, steps should be taken to prevent further contamination. Six general 3. Use integrated pest management (IPM) strategies that principles guide safe pesticide apply pesticides only when an economic benefit to the producer management. will be achieved (i.e., applications based on economic thresholds) and apply pesticides efficiently and at times when runoff losses are least likely. 4. When pesticide applications are necessary and a choice of registered materials exists, consider the persistence, toxicity, runoff potential, and leaching potential of products in making a selection. 5. Periodically calibrate pesticide application equipment. 6. Use anti-backflow devices on the water supply hose, and other safe mixing and loading practices such as a solid pad for mixing and loading, and various new technologies for reducing mixing and loading risks. Management Measure for Pesticides: Description The goal of this management measure is to reduce contamination of ground and surface water from pesticides. The basic concept of the pesticide management measure is to foster effective and safe use of pesticides without causing degrada- tion to the environment. The most effective approach to reducing pesticide pollution of waters is, first, to release a lesser quantity of and/or less toxic Pesticide pesticides into the environment and, second, to use practices that minimize the management movement of pesticides to ground and surface water (Figure 4b-1).
    [Show full text]