DOCSLIB.ORG

Dinotefuran Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dinotefuran Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final Report SERA TR-052-18-03b Dinotefuran 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-08-0019 SERA Internal Task No. 52-18 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 April 24, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ ii List of Figures................................................................................................................................vi List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................... vi ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ............................................................... vii COMMON UNIT CONVERSIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS................................................... ix CONVERSION OF SCIENTIFIC NOTATION ............................................................................ x EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... xi 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................... 5 2.1. OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 5 2.2. CHEMICAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMERCIAL FORMULATIONS....................... 5 2.3. APPLICATION METHODS.............................................................................................. 7 2.3.1. Soil Applications (Broadcast, Drench and Injection) ................................................... 7 2.3.2. Foliar Applications....................................................................................................... 7 2.3.3. Bark Applications ........................................................................................................ 8 2.3.4. Tree Injection................................................................................................................ 8 2.3.5. Relationship of Application Methods to Workbooks .................................................. 9 2.4. MIXING AND APPLICATION RATES ......................................................................... 10 2.4.1. Soil Applications........................................................................................................ 10 2.4.2. Liquid Broadcast Applications .................................................................................. 11 2.4.3. Bark Applications ...................................................................................................... 11 2.4.4. Tree Injection.............................................................................................................. 12 2.5. USE STATISTICS............................................................................................................ 12 3. HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT............................................................................. 13 3.1. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION........................................................................................ 13 3.1.1. Overview..................................................................................................................... 13 3.1.2. Mechanism of Action.................................................................................................. 13 3.1.3. Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism ............................................................................. 14 3.1.3.1. General Considerations........................................................................................ 15 3.1.3.2. Absorption............................................................................................................ 16 3.1.3.3. Excretion.............................................................................................................. 18 3.1.4. Acute Oral Toxicity .................................................................................................... 19 3.1.5. Subchronic or Chronic Systemic Toxic Effects.......................................................... 19 3.1.6. Effects on Nervous System......................................................................................... 20 3.1.7. Effects on Immune System ......................................................................................... 21 3.1.8. Effects on Endocrine System...................................................................................... 21 3.1.9. Reproductive and Developmental Effects .................................................................. 22 3.1.9.1. Developmental Studies ........................................................................................ 22 3.1.9.2. Reproduction Studies........................................................................................... 23 3.1.10. Carcinogenicity and Mutagenicity............................................................................ 23 3.1.11. Irritation and Sensitization (Effects on the Skin and Eyes) ...................................... 23 3.1.11.1. Skin Irritation..................................................................................................... 23 3.1.11.2. Skin Sensitization............................................................................................... 24 3.1.11.3. Ocular Effects .................................................................................................... 24 3.1.12. Systemic Toxic Effects from Dermal Exposure ....................................................... 24 ii 3.1.13. Inhalation Exposure .................................................................................................. 25 3.1.14. Inerts and Adjuvants ................................................................................................. 26 3.1.14.1. Inerts .................................................................................................................. 26 3.1.14.2. Adjuvants ........................................................................................................... 26 3.1.15. Impurities and Metabolites ....................................................................................... 27 3.1.15.1. Metabolites......................................................................................................... 27 3.1.15.2. Impurities ........................................................................................................... 28 3.1.16. Toxicological Interactions ........................................................................................ 28 3.2. EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................... 30 3.2.1. Overview..................................................................................................................... 30 3.2.2. Workers....................................................................................................................... 31 3.2.2.1. General Exposures ............................................................................................... 31 3.2.2.2. Accidental Exposures........................................................................................... 32 3.2.3. General Public........................................................................................................... 33 3.2.3.1.1. Likelihood and Magnitude of Exposure ....................................................... 33 3.2.3.1.2. Summary of Assessments ............................................................................. 34 3.2.3.2. Direct Spray ......................................................................................................... 34 3.2.3.3. Dermal Exposure from Contaminated Vegetation............................................... 35 3.2.3.4. Contaminated Water ............................................................................................ 36 3.2.3.4.1. Accidental Spill............................................................................................. 36 3.2.3.4.2. Accidental Direct Spray/drift for a Pond or Stream...................................... 36 3.2.3.4.3. GLEAMS Modeling...................................................................................... 37 3.2.3.4.4. Other Modeling Efforts................................................................................. 38 3.2.3.4.5. Monitoring Data............................................................................................ 38 3.2.3.4.6. Concentrations in Water Used for Risk Assessment .................................... 38 3.2.3.5. Oral Exposure from Contaminated Fish .............................................................. 39 3.2.3.6. Dermal Exposure from Swimming in Contaminated Water................................ 40 3.2.3.6. Oral Exposure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transport of Dangerous Goods
    ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev.16 (Vol.I) Recommendations on the TRANSPORT OF DANGEROUS GOODS Model Regulations Volume I Sixteenth revised edition UNITED NATIONS New York and Geneva, 2009 NOTE 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 Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev.16 (Vol.I) Copyright © United Nations, 2009 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may, for sales purposes, be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from the United Nations. UNITED NATIONS Sales No. E.09.VIII.2 ISBN 978-92-1-139136-7 (complete set of two volumes) ISSN 1014-5753 Volumes I and II not to be sold separately FOREWORD The Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods are addressed to governments and to the international organizations concerned with safety in the transport of dangerous goods. The first version, prepared by the United Nations Economic and Social Council's Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, was published in 1956 (ST/ECA/43-E/CN.2/170). In response to developments in technology and the changing needs of users, they have been regularly amended and updated at succeeding sessions of the Committee of Experts pursuant to Resolution 645 G (XXIII) of 26 April 1957 of the Economic and Social Council and subsequent resolutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemicals Implicated in Colony Collapse Disorder
    Chemicals Implicated While research is underway to determine the cause of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), pesticides have emerged as one of the prime suspects. Recent bans in Europe attest to the growing concerns surrounding pesticide use and honeybee decline. Neonicotinoids Neonicotinoids are a relatively new class of insecticides that share a common mode of action that affect the central nervous system of insects, resulting in paralysis and death. They include imidacloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin, dinotefuran, nithiazine, thiacloprid and thiamethoxam. According to the EPA, uncertainties have been identified since their initial registration regarding the potential environmental fate and effects of neonicotinoid pesticides, particularly as they relate to pollinators. Studies conducted in the late 1990s suggest that neonicotinic residues can accumulate in pollen and nectar of treated plants and represent a potential risk to pollinators. There is major concern that neonicotinoid pesticides may play a role in recent pollinator declines. Neonicotinoids can also be persistent in the environment, and when used as seed treatments, translocate to residues in pollen and nectar of treated plants. The potential for these residues to affect bees and other pollinators remain uncertain. Despite these uncertainties, neonicotinoids are beginning to dominate the market place, putting pollinators at risk. The case of the neonicotinoids exemplifies two critical problems with current registration procedures and risk assessment methods for pesticides: the reliance on industry-funded science that contradicts peer-reviewed studies and the insufficiency of current risk assessment procedures to account for sublethal effects of pesticides. • Imidacloprid Used in agriculture as foliar and seed treatments, for indoor and outdoor insect control, home gardening and pet products, imidacloprid is the most popular neonicotinoid, first registered in 1994 under the trade names Merit®, Admire®, Advantage TM.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries
    Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries. Peter Jentsch Extension Associate Department of Entomology Cornell University's Hudson Valley Lab 3357 Rt. 9W; PO box 727 Highland, NY 12528 email: [email protected] Phone 845-691-7151 Mobile: 845-417-7465 http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/ent/faculty/jentsch/ 2 Historical Perspectives on Fruit Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Chemistries. by Peter Jentsch I. Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 Synthetic Pesticide Development and Use II. Influences Changing the Pest Management Profile in Apple Production Chemical Residues in Early Insect Management Historical Chemical Regulation Recent Regulation Developments Changing Pest Management Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 The Science Behind The Methodology Pesticide Revisions – Requirements For New Registrations III. Resistance of Insect Pests to Insecticides Resistance Pest Management Strategies IV. Reduced Risk Chemistries: New Modes of Action and the Insecticide Treadmill Fermentation Microbial Products Bt’s, Abamectins, Spinosads Juvenile Hormone Analogs Formamidines, Juvenile Hormone Analogs And Mimics Insect Growth Regulators Azadirachtin, Thiadiazine Neonicotinyls Major Reduced Risk Materials: Carboxamides, Carboxylic Acid Esters, Granulosis Viruses, Diphenyloxazolines, Insecticidal Soaps, Benzoyl Urea Growth Regulators, Tetronic Acids, Oxadiazenes , Particle Films, Phenoxypyrazoles, Pyridazinones, Spinosads, Tetrazines , Organotins, Quinolines. 3 I Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 The apple has a rather ominous origin. Its inception is framed in the biblical text regarding the genesis of mankind. The backdrop appears to be the turbulent setting of what many scholars believe to be present day Iraq.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Pest Management Plan 2021-22
    Denair Unified School District INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN Contacts Denair Unified School District 3460 Lester Rd., Denair, CA Mark Hodges (209) 632-7514 Ext 1215 [email protected] District IPM Coordinator Phone Number e-mail address IPM Statement It is the goal of Denair Unified School District to implement IPM by focusing on long-term prevention or suppression of pests through accurate pest identification, by frequent monitoring for pest presence, by applying appropriate action levels, and by making the habitat less conducive to pests using sanitation and mechanical and physical controls. Pesticides that are effective will be used in a manner that minimizes risks to people, property, and the environment, and only after other options have been shown ineffective. Pest Management Objectives: • Focus on long-term pest prevention using minimal pesticides. • Elimination of significant threats caused by pests to the health and safety of students, staff and the public. • Prevention of loss or damage to structures or property by pests. • Protection of environmental quality inside and outside buildings, in playgrounds and athletic areas, and throughout the Denair Unified School District facilities. IPM Team In addition to the IPM Coordinator, other individuals who are involved in purchasing, making IPM decisions, applying pesticides, and complying with the Healthy Schools Act requirements, include: Name Role Mark Hodges Making IPM Decisions Jerri Pierce Recordkeeping, and Making IPM Decisions Daniel Meza Applying Pesticides, Recordkeeping,
    [Show full text]
  • Froggatt) (Diptera: Tephritidae
    insects Article Efficacy of Chemicals for the Potential Management of the Queensland Fruit Fly Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt) (Diptera: Tephritidae) Olivia L. Reynolds 1,2,*, Terrence J. Osborne 2 and Idris Barchia 3 1 Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation (New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Charles Sturt University), Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Private Bag 4008, Narellan, NSW 2567, Australia 2 New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Biosecurity and Food Safety, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Private Bag 4008, Narellan, NSW 2567, Australia; [email protected] 3 New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Chief Scientist’s Branch, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Private Bag 4008, Narellan, NSW 2567, Australia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-246-406-200 Academic Editors: Michael J. Stout, Jeff Davis, Rodrigo Diaz and Julien M. Beuzelin Received: 2 February 2017; Accepted: 2 May 2017; Published: 9 May 2017 Abstract: This study investigated alternative in-field chemical controls against Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt). Bioassay 1 tested the mortality of adults exposed to fruit and filter paper dipped in insecticide, and the topical application of insecticide to adults/fruit. Bioassay 2 measured the mortality of adults permitted to oviposit on fruit dipped in insecticide and aged 0, 1, 3, or 5 days, plus the production of offspring. Bioassay 3 tested infested fruit sprayed with insecticide. The field bioassay trialed the mortality of adults exposed to one- and five-day insecticide residues on peaches, and subsequent offspring. Abamectin, alpha-cypermethrin, clothianidin, dimethoate (half-label rate), emamectin benzoate, fenthion (half- and full-label rate), and trichlorfon were the most efficacious in bioassay 1, across 18 tested insecticide treatments.
    [Show full text]
  • Hymenoptera; Andrenidae) Manuela Giovanetti, Eloisa Lasso
    Body size, loading capacity and rate of reproduction in the communal bee Andrena agilissima (Hymenoptera; Andrenidae) Manuela Giovanetti, Eloisa Lasso To cite this version: Manuela Giovanetti, Eloisa Lasso. Body size, loading capacity and rate of reproduction in the com- munal bee Andrena agilissima (Hymenoptera; Andrenidae). Apidologie, Springer Verlag, 2005, 36 (3), pp.439-447. hal-00892151 HAL Id: hal-00892151 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00892151 Submitted on 1 Jan 2005 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Apidologie 36 (2005) 439–447 © INRA/DIB-AGIB/ EDP Sciences, 2005 439 DOI: 10.1051/apido:2005028 Original article Body size, loading capacity and rate of reproduction in the communal bee Andrena agilissima (Hymenoptera; Andrenidae)1 Manuela GIOVANETTIa*, Eloisa LASSOb** a Dip. Biologia, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 26, 20133 Milano, Italy b Dep. Plant Biology, University of Illinois, 505 S. Goodwin Av., 265 Morrill Hall, Urbana, IL 61801, USA Received 12 February 2004 – revised 3 November 2004 – accepted 12 November 2004 Published online 9 August 2005 Abstract – In bees, body size may be particularly important in determining the loading capacity, and consequently the rate of reproduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Immunosuppression in Honeybee Queens by the Neonicotinoids Thiacloprid and Clothianidin
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Immunosuppression in Honeybee Queens by the Neonicotinoids Thiacloprid and Clothianidin Received: 24 November 2016 Annely Brandt1, Katharina Grikscheit2, Reinhold Siede1, Robert Grosse2, Marina Doris Accepted: 19 May 2017 Meixner 1 & Ralph Büchler1 Published: xx xx xxxx Queen health is crucial to colony survival of honeybees, since reproduction and colony growth rely solely on the queen. Queen failure is considered a relevant cause of colony losses, yet few data exist concerning effects of environmental stressors on queens. Here we demonstrate for the first time that exposure to field-realistic concentrations of neonicotinoid pesticides can severely affect the immunocompetence of queens of western honeybees (Apis mellifera L.). In young queens exposed to thiacloprid (200 µg/l or 2000 µg/l) or clothianidin (10 µg/l or 50 µg/l), the total hemocyte number and the proportion of active, differentiated hemocytes was significantly reduced. Moreover, functional aspects of the immune defence namely the wound healing/melanisation response, as well as the antimicrobial activity of the hemolymph were impaired. Our results demonstrate that neonicotinoid insecticides can negatively affect the immunocompetence of queens, possibly leading to an impaired disease resistance capacity. Honeybees are highly eusocial insects that build colonies of several thousand individuals which contain only one fertile female, the queen1. This queen is responsible for all egg laying and brood production within the colony; consequently, her integrity and health is crucial for the colony’s performance and survival, and any impairment can result in adverse effects on colony fitness. In the worst case, if the workers are unable to replace a failing queen, the colony will perish2–4.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a CEN Standardised Method for Liquid Chromatography Coupled to Accurate Mass Spectrometry
    Development of a CEN standardised method for liquid chromatography coupled to accurate mass spectrometry CONTENTS 1. Aim and scope ................................................................................................................. 2 2. Short description ................................................................................................................ 2 3. Apparatus and consumables ......................................................................................... 2 4. Chemicals ........................................................................................................................... 2 5. Procedure ........................................................................................................................... 3 5.1. Sample preparation ................................................................................................... 3 5.2. Recovery experiments for method validation ...................................................... 3 5.3. Extraction method ...................................................................................................... 3 5.4. Measurement .............................................................................................................. 3 5.5. Instrumentation and analytical conditions ............................................................ 4 5.5.1. Dionex Ultimate 3000 .......................................................................................... 4 5.5.2. QExactive Focus HESI source parameters .....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Pollen Collected by Andrena Flavipes Panzer (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae) in Sweet Cherry Orchards, Afyonkarahisar Province of Turkey
    Hindawi Publishing Corporation Psyche Volume 2010, Article ID 160789, 5 pages doi:10.1155/2010/160789 Research Article Analysis of Pollen Collected by Andrena flavipes Panzer (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae) in Sweet Cherry Orchards, Afyonkarahisar Province of Turkey Yasemin Guler¨ 1 and Kadriye Sorkun2 1 Plant Protection Central Research Institute, Gayret Mahallesi, Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bulvari, No: 66, 06172 Yenimahalle/Ankara, Turkey 2 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Hacettepe University, 06800 Beytepe/Ankara, Turkey Correspondence should be addressed to Yasemin Guler,¨ [email protected] Received 29 July 2009; Revised 4 December 2009; Accepted 7 January 2010 Academic Editor: James C. Nieh Copyright © 2010 Y. Guler¨ and K. Sorkun. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Andrena, which is the largest genus in the Andrenidae, is a very important genus for the pollination of fruit trees. Andrena flavipes Panzer is one of the most common species observed in the study area and can continue the flight activity even under low temperature. In this study, the pollen collected by A. flavipes was determined. In addition, the potential to carry sweet cherry pollen of the aforementioned species was also researched. For the pollen preparates, the scopae of 34 females were used. As a result of the diagnosis studies, it was determined that A. flavipes species collected the pollens of 13 families and that the dominant pollen group belonged to the Brassicaceae. It was ascertained that A. flavipes collected sweet cherry pollen and that the sweet cherry flowers do not represent a primary pollen source, however.
    [Show full text]
  • Ants in the Home Fact Sheet No
    Ants in the Home Fact Sheet No. 5.518 Insect Series|Home and Garden by W.S. Cranshaw* Almost anywhere in the state one the nest, tend the young and do other Quick Facts travels, ants will be the most common necessary colony duties. Many kinds of insects that can be found in yards, gardens, ants produce workers that are all the • Most ants that are found in fields and forests. Tremendous numbers same size (monomorphic); some, such as homes nest outdoors and of ants normally reside in a typical house field ants, have workers that vary in size enter homes only to search lot, although most lead unobserved lives (polymorphic). for food or water. underground or otherwise out of sight. Each colony contains one or, sometimes, Often it is only when they occur indoors or a few queens (Figure 1). These are fertile • Almost all ants are workers, produce their periodic mating swarms that females that are larger than workers and wingless females that search they come to human attention. dedicated to egg production. The minute for food and maintain the Overall, the activities of ants are quite eggs are taken from the queen and tended colony. beneficial. Many feed on other insects, by the workers. Upon egg hatch, the • A small proportion of an including pest insects. Ant scavenging pale-colored, legless larvae are fed and helps to recycle organic matter and their protected by the workers. When full-grown, ant colony are winged tunneling is useful in aerating and mixing ant larvae produce a smooth silken cocoon reproductive forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence for the Effects of Neonicotinoids Used in Arable Crop
    James et al. Environ Evid (2016) 5:22 DOI 10.1186/s13750-016-0072-9 Environmental Evidence SYSTEMATIC MAP PROTOCOL Open Access Evidence for the effects of neonicotinoids used in arable crop production on non‑target organisms and concentrations of residues in relevant matrices: a systematic map protocol Katy L. James1, Nicola P. Randall1* , Keith F. A. Walters1, Neal R. Haddaway2 and Magnus Land2 Abstract Background: Neonicotinoid insecticides (NNIs) have been routinely used in arable crop protection since their devel- opment in the early 1990s. These insecticides have been subject to the same registration procedures as other groups of pesticides, thus meet the same environmental hazard standards as all crop protection products. However, during the last 10 years the debate regarding their possible detrimental impact on non-target organisms, particularly pollina- tors, has become increasingly contentious and widely debated. Against this background, legislators and politicians in some countries, have been faced with a need to make decisions on the future registration of some or all of this class of insecticides, based on published evidence that in some areas is incomplete or limited in extent. This has created much concern in agricultural communities that consider that the withdrawal of these insecticides is likely to have significant negative economic, socio-economic and environmental consequences. Methods: The proposed systematic map aims to address the following primary question: What is the available evidence for the effects of neonicotinoids used in arable crop production on non-target organisms and concentra- tions of residues in relevant matrices? The primary question will be divided into two sub-questions to gather research literature for (1) the effect of NNIs on non-target organisms (2) the occurrence of concentrations of NNIs in matrices of relevance to non-target organisms (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision for Imidacloprid
    Docket Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844 www.regulations.gov Imidacloprid Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision Case Number 7605 January 2020 Approved by: Elissa Reaves, Ph.D. Acting Director Pesticide Re-evaluation Division Date: __ 1-22-2020 __ Docket Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844 www.regulations.gov Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 4 A. Summary of Imidacloprid Registration Review............................................................... 5 B. Summary of Public Comments on the Draft Risk Assessments and Agency Responses 7 II. USE AND USAGE ............................................................................................................... 14 III. SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENTS ......................................................................................... 15 A. Human Health Risks....................................................................................................... 15 1. Risk Summary and Characterization .......................................................................... 15 2. Human Incidents and Epidemiology .......................................................................... 17 3. Tolerances ................................................................................................................... 18 4. Human Health Data Needs ......................................................................................... 18 B. Ecological Risks ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]