DOCSLIB.ORG

Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process February 2011 Agronomy Technical Note No. 5 Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process Natural Resources Conservation Service Issued February 2011 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all pro- grams.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for commu- nication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process Introduction Pest management in conservation planning This technical note is designed to help conservation planners apply the Natural Resources Conservation Conservation planners start by identifying site-specific Service (NRCS) Integrated Pest Management (IPM) natural resource concerns in the conservation plan- Conservation Practice Standard (CPS) Code 595 and ning process. For pest management related concerns, other NRCS conservation practices in the conserva- this can include the potential for pest management tion planning process to prevent and/or mitigate pest activities to impact soil, water, air, plants, animals, and management risks to natural resources. humans. Once site-specific natural resource concerns are identified, conservation planners perform NRCS The term “integrated pest management” and its pest management policy roles 1, 2, and 3 in the con- acronym “IPM” are widely used and can refer to servation planning process by evaluating the potential anything from an individual pest management for site-specific pest management risks to identified technique to a complex year-round pest management natural resources and applying appropriate NRCS con- system. This document references IPM techniques, servation practices (including the NRCS IPM conser- elements, strategies, guidelines, systems, and vation practice) to prevent and/or mitigate identified programs, but the NRCS IPM conservation practice is risks. very specifically defined by CPS Code 595 available at: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/ For example, if a conservation planner identified a standards/595.docx. concern about potential pesticide impacts on a nearby drinking water reservoir, he or she would use the NRCS pest management policy NRCS Windows Pesticide Screening Tool (WIN–PST) to evaluate potential pesticide risks to drinking water from pesticide losses in surface runoff. Based on site- The NRCS pest management policy is contained in specific WIN–PST results, the NRCS IPM conservation GM_190_404_A–D, Amendment 12, dated March practice and other conservation practices could then 2009, available at: http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/ be applied as appropriate to prevent/mitigate hazard- RollupViewer.aspx?hid=17015. ous pesticide losses to the reservoir. The NRCS pest management policy states that conser- Pest management risks can also be associated with the vation planners have four roles in pest management: use of mechanical, biological, or cultural pest suppres- 1. Evaluate environmental risks associated with a sion techniques, but they must be evaluated with other client’s probable pest suppression strategies tools, such as the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equa- tion 2 (RUSLE2), or the professional judgment of the 2. Provide technical assistance to clients to mitigate conservation planner. identified environmental risks 3. Assist clients to adopt IPM techniques that pro- Conservation planners also perform role 4 in the NRCS tect natural resources pest management policy in the conservation planning process, but with the application of the NRCS Brush 4. Assist clients to— Management, CPS Code 314 and NRCS Herbaceous – inventory, assess, and suppress noxious and Weed Control, CPS Code 315. Both of these conserva- invasive weeds on noncropland tion practices are used on noncropland to address – suppress weeds to ensure successful imple- natural resource concerns related to plant pests, mentation and/or maintenance of permanent including invasive, noxious, and prohibited plants. The vegetative conservation practices (e.g., buffer- NRCS IPM conservation practice can also be used to type conservation practices) prevent and/or mitigate pest management environmen- Agronomy Technical Note No. 5, 1st E., Amend. 1, February 2014 Pest Management in the Conservation Planning Process tal risks associated with the application of the NRCS sion techniques when the economic benefit is greater Brush Management and Herbaceous Weed Control than the cost. These economic pest thresholds must conservation practices. be developed by the Cooperative Extension Service and other IPM experts for each pest in each cropping Applying the NRCS IPM conservation system based on the biology of the crop and pest and practice the pest’s natural enemies. The economic threshold is then dynamically adjusted based on the current cost of The NRCS IPM conservation practice is specifically the pest suppression technique and projected value of designed to document the application of IPM tech- the crop. niques that address site-specific natural resource concerns. The NRCS IPM conservation practice is not A comprehensive IPM system also includes carefully designed to manage pests. Technical assistance for managing the use of different pest suppression tech- managing pests on cropland is not an identified role niques to delay the onset of pest resistance to each for conservation planners, but they must still work suppression technique. Using a combination of dif- closely with the Cooperative Extension Service, pro- ferent techniques including pesticides with different ducers, and their crop consultants to appropriately modes of action is critical to maintaining their efficacy integrate all planned pest management activities into and delaying the onset of pest resistance. the conservation planning process. The adoption of a comprehensive IPM system is always preferred, but Finally, a comprehensive IPM system must also miti- the NRCS IPM conservation practice is not designed gate environmental risks that cannot be prevented by to prescribe what constitutes a comprehensive IPM using appropriate IPM techniques that help minimize system. Commodity-specific IPM elements, guidelines, risks to nontarget species in the field and reduce and year-round IPM programs are often available at offsite movement of hazardous pesticides. the State level from land-grant universities and the Cooperative Extension Service to identify what consti- In some cropping systems, a comprehensive IPM tutes a comprehensive IPM system. These guidelines system will not be feasible because appropriate IPM should be used to help document the application of technology has yet to be developed. In these cases, the NRCS IPM conservation practice. Comprehensive the NRCS IPM conservation practice can be used to IPM systems use a site-specific combination of pest support the application of individual IPM techniques if prevention, avoidance, monitoring, and suppression they appropriately mitigate site-specific pest suppres- (PAMS) strategies. For more information, see: sion risks to natural resources and/or humans. • http://www.ipmcenters.org/ipmelements/index. Note: Identified risks associated with planned pest cfm suppression can also be addressed through other • http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops- conservation practices or a system of conservation agriculture.html practices that includes the NRCS IPM conservation practice. • http://www.ipmcenters.org/ipmsymposiumv/ posters/142.pdf Pesticide registration versus pesticide While efficacy will always play an important role in risk analysis in conservation planning what IPM techniques are appropriate for each site, the NRCS IPM conservation practice is only used to docu- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ment specific environmental risk prevention and/or regulates pesticides under two major Federal statutes: mitigation benefits, not efficacy. The goal of the NRCS the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide IPM conservation practice is to prevent environmen- Act (FIFRA) and Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic tal risks with an efficient IPM system, if possible, and Act (FFDCA), both amended by the Food Quality Pro- mitigate any environmental risks that cannot be pre- tection Act (FQPA) of 1996. vented. Under FIFRA, pesticides intended for use in the United A comprehensive IPM system will prevent and avoid States must be registered (licensed) by the EPA before pests as much as possible to reduce the need for pest they may be sold or distributed in commerce. The EPA suppression, including the use of hazardous pesticides. will register a pesticide if scientific data provided by the applicant show that when used according to label- A comprehensive IPM system also includes carefully ing directions it will not cause “unreasonable adverse monitoring pest populations and only using suppres- effects on the environment.” FIFRA defines “unreason-
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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Biodegradation and Bioremediation of Organic Pesticides
    Chapter 12 Biodegradation and Bioremediation of Organic Pesticides Jesús Bernardino Velázquez-Fernández, Abril Bernardette Martínez-Rizo, Maricela Ramírez-Sandoval and Delia Domínguez-Ojeda Additional information is available at the end of the chapter http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/46845 1. Introduction Pesticides can be used to control or to manage pest populations at a tolerable level. The suffix “-cide” literally means “kill”, therefore, the term pesticide refers to a chemical substance that kills pests. It is incorrect to assume that the term pesticide refers only to insecticides. Pesticides include many different types of products with different functions or target (Table 1). The pesticide designation is formed by combining the name of the pest (e.g., insect or mite) with the suffix “-cide” (1). Pesticides could be classified according to their toxicity, chemical group, environmental persistence, target organism, or other features. According to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 9 of the 12 persistent organic chemicals are pesticides. Classes of organic pesticides (consisting of organic molecules) include organochlorine, organophosphate, organometallic, pyrethroids, and carbamates among others (2, 3). Most pesticides cause adverse effects when reaching organisms. The intensity of the toxic effect varies with time, dose, organism characteristics, environmental presence or pesticide characteristics. Their presence in environment determines the dose and time at which an organism is exposed and could represent a hazard for worldwide life due to their mobility. Hence, the persistence in the environment leads to a risk for life: the more persistent a pesticide is, the worse its environmental impact. Pesticide persistence in environment is caused by either their physico-chemical properties or the lack of organisms able to degrade them.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticide Mitigation Practices and Techniques
    Agronomy Technical Note XXX: Pesticide Mitigation Practices and Techniques Introduction 4. Field pesticide volatization/drift in This document is intended to be used as a air. supporting document to implement the 5. Determining the toxicological hazard NRCS Conservation Practice Standard (596) posed by the pesticide. Pesticide Risk Mitigation and in general 6. Characterizing risk by combining Integrated Pest Management (IPM) planning pesticide exposure and toxicity. where there is a need to mitigate for potential losses of pesticides that can may Pesticide hazard ratings refer to the WIN- pose offsite risks. PST soil and pesticide interaction ratings for: NOTE: If the identified hazards and risks 1. IARP (fish) – Soil Pesticide associated with the planned pesticides can Interactive Adsorbed Runoff be addressed through planned conservation Potential for Fish practices or system of conservation practices 2. ILP (fish) - Soil Pesticide Interactive then those pesticides do not apply to the Leaching Potential for Fish Conservation Practice Standard – Pesticide 3. ISRP (fish) - Soil Pesticide Risk Mitigation (596). Also, it is not Interactive Solution Runoff for Fish necessary to assess risk or hazard of 4. ILP (human) - Soil Pesticide pesticides that are used for seed treatment Interactive Leaching Potential for and/or banded with seed, or similar Humans pesticides, where the exposure of these 5. ISRP (human) - Soil Pesticide pesticides are very limited. Interactive Solution Runoff for Humans NRCS Pesticide Risk/Hazard Analysis Pesticide registrations and label use WIN-PST is the NRCS technical tool that to restrictions are both based on risk analysis assess pesticide hazard based on: and determining if the benefits of a proposed • Pesticide data pesticide use outweigh the potential risks.
    [Show full text]
  • Behavior of Pesticides in Soils and Water 1
    Archival copy: for current recommendations see http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu or your local extension office. SL 40 Behavior of Pesticides in Soils and Water 1 P.S.C. Rao and A.G. Hornsby2 During the past twenty years, concern has arisen applied, and to show how this information can be as to the presence of pesticides in the environment used, along with other factors, to select the proper and the threat they pose to wildlife and mankind. pesticide. Certainly, pesticides have improved longevity and the quality of life, chiefly in the area of public health. PATHWAYS OF PESTICIDE LOSS The use of pesticides also constitutes an important There are basically two ways properly-applied aspect of modern agriculture. Florida's temperate to pesticides may reach surface and ground waters- subtropical climate favors growth of many harmful through runoff and leaching. Runoff is the physical insects, weeds and diseases, thus making this state transport of pollutants over the ground surface by particularly dependent on pesticides for economical rainwater which does not penetrate the soil. Leaching crop management. is a process whereby pollutants are flushed through Unfortunately, pesticides are poisons and can be the soil by rain or irrigation water as it moves particularly dangerous when misused. Fish-kills, downward. In many areas of Florida, soils are sandy reproductive failure in birds, and acute illnesses in and permeable and leaching is likely to be a more people have all been attributed to exposure to or serious problem than runoff. We now have ingestion of pesticides - usually as a result of technology to help estimate the potential misapplication or careless disposal of unused contamination of water from a given pesticide.
    [Show full text]
  • AP-42, CH 9.2.2: Pesticide Application
    9.2.2PesticideApplication 9.2.2.1General1-2 Pesticidesaresubstancesormixturesusedtocontrolplantandanimallifeforthepurposesof increasingandimprovingagriculturalproduction,protectingpublichealthfrompest-bornediseaseand discomfort,reducingpropertydamagecausedbypests,andimprovingtheaestheticqualityofoutdoor orindoorsurroundings.Pesticidesareusedwidelyinagriculture,byhomeowners,byindustry,andby governmentagencies.Thelargestusageofchemicalswithpesticidalactivity,byweightof"active ingredient"(AI),isinagriculture.Agriculturalpesticidesareusedforcost-effectivecontrolofweeds, insects,mites,fungi,nematodes,andotherthreatstotheyield,quality,orsafetyoffood.Theannual U.S.usageofpesticideAIs(i.e.,insecticides,herbicides,andfungicides)isover800millionpounds. AiremissionsfrompesticideusearisebecauseofthevolatilenatureofmanyAIs,solvents, andotheradditivesusedinformulations,andofthedustynatureofsomeformulations.Mostmodern pesticidesareorganiccompounds.EmissionscanresultdirectlyduringapplicationorastheAIor solventvolatilizesovertimefromsoilandvegetation.Thisdiscussionwillfocusonemissionfactors forvolatilization.Thereareinsufficientdataavailableonparticulateemissionstopermitemission factordevelopment. 9.2.2.2ProcessDescription3-6 ApplicationMethods- Pesticideapplicationmethodsvaryaccordingtothetargetpestandtothecroporothervalue tobeprotected.Insomecases,thepesticideisapplieddirectlytothepest,andinotherstothehost plant.Instillothers,itisusedonthesoilorinanenclosedairspace.Pesticidemanufacturershave developedvariousformulationsofAIstomeetboththepestcontrolneedsandthepreferred
    [Show full text]
  • {Effects of Moisture and Temperature on Pesticide
    J. Serb. Chem. Soc. 85 (2) 191–201 (2020) UDC 664.641.1–913:632.95+536.5 JSCS–5293 Original scientific paper Effects of moisture and temperature on pesticide stability in corn flour YETONG LIU1, XU QIN2, QIUSHENG CHEN1, QIANG ZHANG1, PING YIN1 and YONGZE GUO1* 1Tianjin Institute of Agricultural Quality Standard and Testing Technology, Tianjin 300381, China and 2Innovation Team of Remediation for Heavy Metal Contaminated Farmland of Chinese Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Agro-Environmental Protection Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Tianjin 300191, China (Received 22 June, revised 3 September, accepted 9 September 2019) Abstract: Corn flour has been stored at different moisture content (without and with 10 % water) and temperatures (–20, 4 and 25 °C). A modified quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe (QuEChERS) method was applied to deter- mine the degradation rate of five common pesticides (imidacloprid, carben- dazim, triadimefon, acetochlor and metolachlor) during the stored process using high-performance liquid chromatography with a diode array detector and gas chromatography with an electron capture detector. The results showed that there was almost no degradation on five pesticides at –20 °C in corn flour whether with or without water, and the half-life was 69.3–693.2 days. The deg- radation rate ranged from 1.7 to 7.8 % after ten days of application. Under 25 °C and 10 % moisture content, the half-life was sharply reduced to 5.8–14.4 days. Under this condition, the degradation rate ranged from 40.6 to 68.4 % after ten days of application, and the sequence from high to low of the five pesticides.
    [Show full text]
  • Degradation Rates of Alachlor, Atrazine and Bentazone in the Profiles of Polish Luvisols Tadeusz Paszko* and Paweł Muszyński
    Int. Agrophys., 2017, 31, 401-410 doi: 10.1515/intag-2016-0053 Degradation rates of alachlor, atrazine and bentazone in the profiles of Polish Luvisols Tadeusz Paszko* and Paweł Muszyński Department of Chemistry, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland Received September 29, 2016; accepted April 27, 2017 A b s t r a c t. The degradation rates of three herbicides (ala- in profile depth; therefore, pesticide degradation in subsoils chlor, atrazine, and bentazone) were examined according to is slower (Goberna et al., 2006). However, in some cases, OECD Guideline 307 in three profiles of grey-brown podzolic the degradation rate may increase deeper into the soil profile soil (Luvisol) in a laboratory experiment. The aim of the experi- (Karpouzas et al., 2001), for example, when the decrease ment was to determine herbicide degradation parameters and in the organic matter content in subsoils is accompanied their relationships with soil properties. Degradation processes were effectively described by a first-order model. However, in by an increase in the bioavailability of the pesticide (Di some cases, the best results were produced by bi-phasic kinetics et al., 1998). The activity of soil enzymes and the overall (hockey-stick and bi-exponential model). The degradation rates biological activity of soil are usually well correlated with of the tested herbicides at 25°C and 40% maximum water holding pesticide degradation rates in topsoil. However, this cor- capacity, established based on half-life values in the Ap horizon, relation is much weaker in subsoils. The degradation rate in increased in the following order: atrazine (32.6-42.8 days) < ben- soil horizons with a depth of around 1 m is often lower than tazone (3.4-16.6 days < alachlor (4.4-5.7 days).
    [Show full text]
  • Insights Into the Toxicity and Degradation Mechanisms of Imidacloprid Via Physicochemical and Microbial Approaches
    toxics Review Insights into the Toxicity and Degradation Mechanisms of Imidacloprid Via Physicochemical and Microbial Approaches Shimei Pang 1,2, Ziqiu Lin 1,2, Yuming Zhang 1,2, Wenping Zhang 1,2, Nasser Alansary 1,2, Sandhya Mishra 1,2 , Pankaj Bhatt 1,2 and Shaohua Chen 1,2,* 1 State Key Laboratory for Conservation and Utilization of Subtropical Agro-Bioresources, Guangdong Province Key Laboratory of Microbial Signals and Disease Control, Integrative Microbiology Research Centre, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China; [email protected] (S.P.); [email protected] (Z.L.); [email protected] (Y.Z.); [email protected] (W.Z.); [email protected] (N.A.); [email protected] (S.M.); [email protected] (P.B.) 2 Guangdong Laboratory for Lingnan Modern Agriculture, Guangzhou 510642, China * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-20-8528-8229 Received: 22 July 2020; Accepted: 26 August 2020; Published: 1 September 2020 Abstract: Imidacloprid is a neonicotinoid insecticide that has been widely used to control insect pests in agricultural fields for decades. It shows insecticidal activity mainly by blocking the normal conduction of the central nervous system in insects. However, in recent years, imidacloprid has been reported to be an emerging contaminant in all parts of the world, and has different toxic effects on a variety of non-target organisms, including human beings, due to its large-scale use. Hence, the removal of imidacloprid from the ecosystem has received widespread attention. Different remediation approaches have been studied to eliminate imidacloprid residues from the environment, such as oxidation, hydrolysis, adsorption, ultrasound, illumination, and biodegradation.
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticide Degradation and Crop Protection
    A Bioaugmentation Approach to Pesticide Bioremediation: Pesticide Degradation and Crop Protection MASTER THESIS, SUSTAINABLE BIOTECHNOLOGY SECTION AALBORG UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN Author: Supervisor: Alexandru Adrian Vlăiculescu Cristiano Varrone Birgit Jensen June 2020 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 7 1.1. Pesticides................................................................................................................................. 7 1.2. History of the use of pesticides ............................................................................................... 7 1.3. Types of pesticides .................................................................................................................. 8 1.4. Environmental impact of pesticides ...................................................................................... 12 1.5. Pesticide degradation ............................................................................................................ 13 1.5.1. Abiotic degradation ....................................................................................................... 14 1.5.2. Biotic degradation ......................................................................................................... 15 1.6. Pesticides: bioaugmentation and biostimulation ................................................................... 16 1.7. The crop protection function of bacteria
    [Show full text]