and This is 14 PBO and 13,14 + Hippodamia -phenothrin Hippodamia -phenothrin δ d Resources and ; δ A. domesticus, values decreased for -phenothrin (94.9% 2 PBO. Based on the 50 δ − + . , Department of Lan 2008 Society of Chemical Industry Acheta domesticus c PBO. The LC or no-effect concentration). A. domesticus, H. convergens + 50 -phenothrin δ S. frugiperda for values for resmethrin and 2 − 50 (JE Smith), to resmethrin and and then -phenothrin δ (L.), adult convergent lady beetle, tential non-target terrestrial insect impacts from een species mortality and concentrationexplained mber 2008 Published online in Wiley Interscience: 18 December 2008 -phenothrin are limited because of a lack of toxicity data for -phenothrin, resmethrin and PBO were prepared for each δ δ Environmental Sciences, Montana3120, USA. State E-mail: [email protected] University, Bozeman, MT 59717- Department of Land Resources andUniversity, Bozeman, Environmental MT Sciences, 59717-3120, USA Montana State Correspondence to: Robert KD Peterson H. convergens Ecological risk assessments of pyrethroids such as resmethrin PBO were 26.9, 74.91 and 228.57 ng cm ∗ + often accomplished using the risk quotient (RQ)the method, whereby estimated environmentalwith concentration a toxic (EEC) endpoint (e.g. is LC compared and non-target terrestrial invertebrates. Therefore, the objective of this study was to estimate LC doses to estimated or actual environmental exposures. 22.1 MATERIALS AND METHODS Insecticides Technical-grade resmethrin (94.3% purity), purity), and a synergist, piperonylwere butoxide obtained from (PBO) Sigma-Aldrich (98.2% (St purity), Louis,for MO). Stock solutions pesticide before each experimentand by PBO in dissolving acetone, and the serial insecticides pipetting. dilutions were Concentrations made by were volumetric expressedbasis. on a weight/volume against three non-target, surrogate insect species. ∗ Spodoptera frugiperda Acheta domesticus In terms of sensitivities among the insects to resmethrin PBO was generally more toxic than -phenothrin + δ 7,8 PBO were 23.2, 32.08 and 307.18 ng cm + -phenothrin are -phenothrin [3- δ δ PBO and 72–97% of the variation for values for + 50 3,4 was most sensitive, followed by In pesticide risk assessment, -phenothrin and resmethrin to ; insecticide toxicity )-2,2-dimethyl-3-(2-methylprop- respectively. The regression relationship betw 9–12 δ SR With the increased prevalence of ,3 In public health, RS values for resmethrin -2,2-dimethyl-3-(2-methylprop-1-enyl)- However, most studies of the impact 1 ;1 2–6 1 50 ´ eneville), and larval fall armyworm, seems to be a good surrogate species for estimating po A. domesticus RS : 300–305 www.soci.org trans - -phenothrin toxicity for non-target terrestrial ,3 S.frugiperda δ 65 cis RS PBO, )- ´ erin-M and + RS respectively. The 1 day LC 2009; (Gu Spodoptera frugiperda risk assessment; ecotoxicology; house cricket; convergent lady beetle; fall armyworm; ;

A. domesticus -phenothrin are public concerns about the environmental δ

2008 Society of Chemical Industry Risk assessment has been used to quantify risks from Associated with the increased use of permethrin, resmethrin -phenothrin c cyclopropanecarboxylate] are synthetic pyrethroids usedmosquitoes, against human lice and flying andand crawling insects recreational in homes areas. 1-enyl)cyclopropanecarboxylate] andfurylmethyl resmethrin (1 [5-benzyl-3- results, exposure to pyrethroids used in public health applications. Keywords: H.convergens phenoxybenzyl(1 of pyrethroids have beenon limited resmethrin and to aquatic invertebrates. Data mosquito management tactics. and S. frugiperda dose–response relationships for surrogate non-targetdetermined species are from bioassay studies and are used to compare toxic Pest Manag Sci 1INTRODUCTION Pyrethroids areknockdown activity broad-spectrumgroups and of insecticides insecticides. are with among rapid the most effective Abstract BACKGROUND: The susceptibility of adult house cricket, Frank B Antwi and Robert KD Peterson Toxicity of (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI 10.1002/ps.1688 Research Article Received: 8 April 2008 Revised: 5 September 2008non-target insects Accepted: 12 Septe δ CONCLUSION: The results indicate that resmethrin with time for these insecticides for all surrogate species. mosquito-borne pathogens such as West Nile virus inpyrethroids recent such years, as permethrin, resmethrin and 51–81% of the variation for resmethrin invertebrates are limited to honey bees. effects of their usage.management This is using especially these trueapplication rates for insecticides are adult very because, mosquito low,volume (ULV) the although spray, application essentially causes method, the the insecticides ultralow- torelatively drift over large areas. Mostand pyrethroids non-target are insects. toxic to both target convergens convergens being used more widely to manage adult mosquitoes. synergized with piperonyl butoxide (PBO) was evaluated in a laboratory bioassayRESULTS: procedure. The 1 day LC

300 301 2 − X PBO ). 10 + X (10 2 − S. frugiperda X 5 -phenothrin are ), 117.98 ng cm δ X -phenothrin δ 35 . (0 X 2 3 − ) versus log concentration of
( PBO and ), and 2359.66 ng cm + X X 2 (5 2 − a ) respectively. ), 82.59 ng cm 2 X 1 − − 30 X www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/ps . -phenothrin) as well as PBO was dispensed 1 δ (0 2 − X the maximum field application rate. X Hippodamia convergens 75 9.24 78.99 157.97 236.96 394.93 789.87 . ), 1179.83 ng cm 0 . The field rates for resmethrin and X 1 and 4.03 g ha (3 was determined under laboratory conditions. For − ) 1 2 -phenothrin and 10 10 X − − δ X ), 70.79 ng cm 50 ; Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Waltham, MA). Pure acetone 50 Concentration (ng cm X . ,5 3 0 X 25 . 0 ,3 larvae (o) and 80 60 40 20 Acetone solutions of resmethrin (0 X 100 2 X were applied in glass vials (length 4.5 cm,20 diameter cm 2.5 cm, volume provided by Planetlarvae were Natural purchased (Bozeman, in(Carlisle, the MT) PA). third stage and from Benzon Research 2.3 Bioassays The LC was used as thedilution (resmethrin or control. A quantity of 1 mL of the insecticide the establishment of theinsects concentration–mortality were exposed relationships, toon 7, 8 experiment and and 11 species3, concentrations, 5 (0, depending and 0.25, 10 0.30,insecticide) times (Table 0.35, 1). the ‘Field 0.50, maximum application 0.75, rate’ fieldrate means in application 1, the g maximum rates ha 2, for each 7.85 g ha with a micropipette into thehot vials. dog The rollers (model vials HDR-565; were TheCA) then Helman and placed rotated Group, mechanically on Ltd, to Oxnard, coat the vials uniformly until they ,2 − 35 X . 0 ,1 ), 707.90 ng cm X X 75 (2 . X Concentration (log 2 ,0 30 − . X PBO at 0 50 . + adults were ,0 2008 Society of Chemical Industry X adults (mean X Spodoptera frugiperda c 25 . 35 ), . 0 • ( ,0 adults (mean dry X ), 471.93 ng cm -phenothrin. δ X 30 X . Spodoptera frugiperda (1 0.000.00 19.75 10.11 23.7 12.13 27.65 14.15 39.5 20.21 59.24 30.32 78.99 40.43 -phenothrin adults were purchased 2 ,0 , control (acetone); 59.24 ng cm δ − X X H. convergens 25 c . b 5 mg) were chosen because (L.), convergent lady beetle, ´ . eneville) and fall armyworm, Acheta domesticus 35 Acheta domesticus PBO and = ´ erin-M 6 mg) were chosen because of ease . resmethrin + -Phenothrin 0.00 10.11 12.13 14.15 20.21 30.32 40.43 80.85 -Phenothrin -Phenothrin 0.00 10.11 12.13 14.15 20.21 30.32 40.43 80.85 121.28 202.13 404.26 9 ), 235.97 ng cm Resmethrin 0.00 19.75 23.7 27.65 39.5 59.24 78.99 Resmethrin 0.00 19.75 23.7 27.65 39.5 5 Resmethrin δ δ δ X (Gu = 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 75 . (JE Smith). 0 Hippodamia convergens Acheta domesticus : 300–305 80 60 40 20 (0 100

7mg;SD 2

65 , control (acetone); 0 . 15 − (%) Mortality X Acheta domesticus 147 -phenothrin at day 1. δ 4mg;SD 2009; . 98 cm . = -phenothrin and resmethrin to non-target insects www.soci.org Insecticide treatments and concentrations used δ 10 Percentage mortality of = ), 176 X 50 . PBO concentrations for resmethrin were 0 Concentration: 0 PBO concentrations were the same as those of Using serial dilution preparations from the stock solutions, a Hippodamia convergens Spodoptera frugiperda a b (0 c Acheta domesticus Species Treatment 0 Table 1. Toxicity of of handling andlarvae predator were chosen trophic because of level. immature ease of life handling stage. and rearing and from Premium Crickets (Thomson, GA), preliminary experiment was conductedof to insecticide determine concentrations the to range the use. This insects was to done by resmethrin exposing 2.2 Insects Three taxahouse of cricket, terrestrial insects were chosen for bioassay: decreasing concentrations above and below therate until field mortality application rates greater than 0observed. and lower than 100% were resmethrin and weight Pest Manag Sci Figure 1. Hippodamia convergens of ease ofmany handling insecticides. and rearing and known susceptibility to Spodoptera frugiperda dry weight is the larvae, k : 300–305 65 values were 50 2009; 2), where S. frugiperda − The LC k / 2 19 ) versus log concentration of ) versus log concentration of χ

( ( and graphs of percentage Pest Manag Sci 19 values among the insects and between 50 concentration were plotted with Sigma 10 Hippodamia convergens Hippodamia convergens ) ) )and )and -phenothrin δ 10 10 ◦ ◦ -phenothrin Differences in LC δ 0 20–23 80 60 40 20 larvae ( larvae ( 0 100 80 60 40 20 the poor fit of thevariances models by was a accounted for heterogeneity by factor multiplying ( the Plot 8.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). However, for to correct for controlto mortality, vials treated in with whichthan acetone 5%. insects only. were Control exposed mortalities were less 2.4 Data analysis The data were analyzed with SAS 9.1. mortality against log determined withconcentration PROC using PROBIT, PROC mortality REG was regressed on number of concentrations, to account for extrabinomialdue variations to genetic andfit. environmental influences that caused poor 100 Concentration (log Concentration (log was used 18 www.soci.org FB Antwi, R KD Peterson 2008 Society of Chemical Industry ., Spodoptera frugiperda Spodoptera frugiperda c , the caps were ), ), et al • • ( ( S. frugiperda and Antwi 17 . C with a photoperiod of 16 : 8 h ◦ Acheta domesticus Acheta domesticus et al 5 . resmethrin 0 resmethrin ± 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 80 60 40 20

0

100

80 60 40 20

Mortality (%) Mortality 100 Mortality (%) Mortality -phenothrin at day 3. -phenothrin at day 2. δ δ as defined by Perry Percentage mortality of Percentage mortality of 16 Treated vials were placed on large plastic trays and left on the www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/ps were dried. One insect wasa placed perforated cap. in Four each experimental vial replicates wereconcentration and used of covered for each with each insecticide. For Figure 3. lined with a fine-mesh nylon fabric toair prevent circulation escape in and the to vials. allow laboratory bench at 24 Figure 2. resmethrin and resmethrin and light : dark. Insect mortalitiesfor were 3 days. assessed The anddelayed insects recorded mortality were daily and observed exposures for overafter time 3 a days to single potential to residues application accountconsiderable scenario. time for for Because the 3 insects daysdata in represents are the a vials, most the likelymove 1 when the day prodded with mortality forceps most were considered informative. dead.formula, Abbott’s Insects that did not

302 303 S. A. H. 2 a − ) 50 P (0.007 H. con- 0.0001 wasthe 2 < − 43 ng cm Hippodamia (EEC/LC . Risk quotient larvae for days 40 2 = and from 0.09 to 99 ng cm . >χ 2 78 0.9206 7.21 P , from 0.7 to 0.91 for and 72.5–81.8% for larvae for days 1 to 3 = -phenothrin, the slopes , 55.3–69.4% for δ Achetadomesticus -phenothrin with piperonyl S. frugiperda δ c H. convergens larvae. A. domesticus H. convergens FR S. frugiperda ) CI (95%) 6.2 0.5534 0.0552 5.28 0.5135 0.07 were most sensitive, followed by 2 23.7 0.7247 0.0009 40.4 0.8178 0.0001 31.81 0.7795 0.0003 25.57 0.81 0.0023 23.64 0.7976 0.0028 52.96 0.8982 0.0003 14.0971.08 0.6102 0.9343 0.0045 0.0004 17.83 0.6646 0.0022 12.98 0.5906 0.0057 11.36 0.6943 0.0199 10.4 0.6752 0.0234 21.76 0.8131 0.0055 10.21 0.6712 0.0241 A. domesticus − 103.55 0.9539 0.0002 181.03 0.9731 50 ial maximum field rate www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/ps LC (ng cm larvae (Table 2). For S.frugiperda 1 32.08 20.76–43.651 0.3542 74.91 2.46 64.95–90.14 0.3498 0.54 X ). a X 2 X X X X X X X X 12 X − -phenothrin, the models explained 93.4–97.3% for A. domesticus X X X X X X . and from 0.19 to 0.23 for 7 02 d δ 22 91 1 09 11 9 73 78 83 09 2 . . , 79.8–89.8% for ...... X . . treated with resmethrin and 19 23 72 62 0 2 b 0 . . 0 . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lethal concentrations and risk quotients for andthen + , from 0.73 to 0.9 for larvae for days 1 to 3 (Table 2). 0 0 0 1 + + ). + + + + + + + + + + + maximum field rate. 1 94 + + + + and 59.1–66.5% for S. frugiperda . − 69 70 = 79 76 73 35 58 37 44 94 73 03 52 ...... -phenothrin with piperonyl butoxide 43 28 61 31 5 3 10 . . . . δ -Phenothrin commerc 6 9 14 12 3 1 22 17 16 26 30 17 32 38 18 Resmethrin commercial maximum field rate δ EEC ND, no data as confidence interval could not be determined by -Phenothrin -Phenothrin-Phenothrin 2 3 56.02 28.29 45.71–73.85 0.1227 15.45–52.38 0.0114 0.72 1.43 For resmethrin, the slopes varied from 0.83 to 1.09 for In terms of sensitivities among the insects to resmethrin and lb acre Table 4. convergens butoxide TreatmentResmethrin Day a b c d (0.0036 lb acre δ ResmethrinResmethrin 2 3δ 17.85δ 10.95 7.11–24.73 0.5472 ND 4.43 statistical analysis. ======− = =− = = = =− ======-phenothrin, (Table 2). For frugiperda total response variation for vergens domesticus 0.11 for A. domesticus ranged from 1.62 toH. 2.12 convergens for δ convergens 1 to 3 (Table 2). Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y + 2 a − ) 50 (0.007 2 PBO and − + 43 ng cm 2008 Society of Chemical Industry (EEC/LC . Risk quotient c 40 Acheta domesti- 2 = 99 ng cm . >χ 78 ). 0.8362 16.81 P 2 − = c -Phenothrin 1 -Phenothrin 2 -Phenothrin 3 -Phenothrin 3 -Phenothrin 2 -Phenothrin 1 -Phenothrin 3 -Phenothrin 2 -Phenothrin 1 δ δ δ δ δ δ δ δ δ Resmethrin 2 Resmethrin 3 Resmethrin 1 Resmethrin 2 Resmethrin 3 Resmethrin 1 larvae) and resmethrin -phenothrin with piperonyl butoxide δ ) CI (95%) 2 − PBO’ will be referred to as ‘resmethrin’ 50 Acheta domesticus, Hippodamia conver- ial maximum field rate + LC concentration (ng cm larvae larvae larvae larvae Resmethrin 2 larvae Resmethrin 3 larvae Resmethrin 1 : 300–305 = (ng cm X 65 1 26.9 23.51–32.05 0.2008 1.5 1 23.2 17.34–25.41 0.3429 3.41 PBO concentrations. (Hereafter, ‘resmethrin ). 1 − + 2009; d -phenothrin and resmethrin to non-target insects www.soci.org b Lethal concentrations and risk quotients for Relationship between mortality and concentrations of resmethrin and -phenothrin δ δ ). Spodoptera frugiperda maximum field rate. 1 − mortality (%); = -phenothrin’ respectively.) The relationships were signifi- δ treated with resmethrin and = ,and -Phenothrin commerc δ Resmethrin commercial maximum field rate EEC Y ND, no data as confidence interval could not be determined by -Phenothrin -Phenothrin-Phenothrin 2 3 24.37 28.14 20.85–29.97 0.2957 22.97–39.3 0.8045 1.66 1.44 Spodoptera frugiperda Spodoptera frugiperda Spodoptera frugiperda Hippodamia convergens Hippodamia convergens Hippodamia convergens Acheta domesticus Acheta domesticus Acheta domesticus Spodoptera frugiperda Spodoptera frugiperda Spodoptera frugiperda Hippodamia convergens Hippodamia convergens Acheta domesticus Acheta domesticus Hippodamia convergens lb acre (0.0036 lb acre c d a b cus Treatment Day Resmethrin Table 3. a Species Treatment Day Regression model Acheta domesticus Table 2. δ δ δ ResmethrinResmethrin 2 3 13.39 4.7 5.03–18.98 0.9104 ND 5.9 statistical analysis. -phenothrin Toxicity of Pest Manag Sci PBO’ and ‘ 3RESULTS Theresultsofresidualorcontactbioassaysfortheinsectsareshownin Figs 1, 2 and 3.Tables The 3, 4 lethal concentrations and are 5.assumptions. also There Table presented 2 in was shows generally themortality regression a of relationship good between the fit insectsgens to ( the model the treatments wereconfidence limits. determined by comparison of the 95% δ and ‘ cant. For resmethrin, the models explained 51.4–81.3% of the 14 14 a ) 15,24 50 ). If it is : 300–305 50 65 H. convergens 5 for terrestrial -phenothrin to . 5 for resmethrin δ . 0 2009; and 0 ≥ > If terrestrial deposition Risk quotient (EEC/LC were larvae did not exceed 0.5 -phenothrin with piperonyl δ 12,24,25 values were lower on day 1 for observed very low persistence Pest Manag Sci A. domesticus 50 24 . 2 et al S. frugiperda -phenothrin. Risk quotients for some H. convergens δ >χ 0.00010.0001 0.25 0.27 0.00010.0001 0.31 0.22 0.00010.0001 0.26 0.18 P < < < < < < and -phenothrin. δ -phenothrin for all surrogate species compared δ , termed the risk quotient (RQ), gives an estimate 50 concluded that acute and chronic risks to ecological A. domesticus ). -phenothrin. RQs for 1 larvae treated with resmethrin and 10 δ . − ). These results suggest that mortality risks would be greater Toxicities as determined by LC Levels of concern (LOC) are tools that policy makers and In a deterministic, reasonable worst-case risk assessment, Davis 1 − animals (i.e. the estimated exposure is 50% of the LC and for resmethrin or for resmethrin than for receptors, including terrestrial insects, from ULVfor insecticides mosquito used management most likelydata are for low. non-target However, insects toxicity were not available at the time of their were 10% of the application rate, then the EECsULV from application the rates maximum for the insecticides inin this study RQs would that result exceeded 0.5 onlyexposed for to resmethrin on days 2be exceeded. and 3. No other RQ LOCs would regulatory agencies use to assess the acceptability of risks. potential non-target terrestrial insectpyrethroids impacts used in from public exposure health applications. to The USEPA typically uses an acute RQ LOC of Indeed, the weight of evidenceranges from suggests approximately that 1 to surface 10%. deposition The ratio between(EEC) the and estimated LC environmental concentration assumed that the EECs are equivalent to(assuming the field 100% application rates even depositionRQs of for insecticide over 1 ha), daily non-target terrestrial insects may exceedhighly RQ unlikely LOCs. However, that it pyrethroid is after deposition ULV on applications terrestrial would surfaces droplets be produced 100% from of ULV application spraysa rate. are wide Small distributed by area, wind and over observed deposition rates have been low. of malathion and permethrin,Additionally, with the only adsorption trace of resmethrin levels and after 36 h. et al soil particles and vegetationreduce in their the bioavailability, terrestrial further environmenttarget limiting insects. may their effects on non- resmethrin and with those on dayssecond 2 and and third 3. daysexposed The continuously primarily toxicities to because were the the greatercontrast insecticides to the insects on in exposure in the the had the vial, exposure vials been inis the for field much most 72 likely different. h. Knepper In of the risk. TheRQ calculated LOC to RQ determine is if compared there with is the a respective need for regulatory action. ) - 2 δ 50 for − 2 (0.0036 lb acre − Acheta (0.007 lb acre 2 − 2 larvae. − ) (Table 3). ) CI (95%) 2ngcm . www.soci.org FB Antwi, R KD Peterson 2 2 -phenothrin Spodoptera frugiperda 2008 Society of Chemical Industry values were − δ − )andfor c 2 50 − 43 ng cm . 7–23 99 ng cm . . Acheta domesticus 4 40 (ng cm 78 ) (Table 5). = 50 = 2 Spodoptera frugiperda -phenothrin (Table 4). 14 ng cm )andfor = δ values were 0.22–0.31- − . 2 50 -phenothrin for days 1 to − δ 65 ng cm 50 . larvae decreased with time for , varying between 0.83 and 2 − 37–28 larvae were least susceptible . Spodoptera frugiperda values were 2.46–7.21-fold less 57 ng cm 24 . or 67–361 50 . -phenothrin. = -phenothrin. Comparison of the LC δ -phenothrin. The LC values were 10.95–32.08 ng cm δ , lethal concentrations decreased with δ 11 307.18 228.57 169.62–664.63 158.83–394.3 256 S.frugiperda for resmethrin and 228.57–151.94 ng 50 50 A. domesticus 94–228 2 . larvae were the least sensitive species LC ial maximum field rate = for − -phenothrin for days 1 to 3 (Table 5). -phenothrin. The house cricket, ). The LC S. frugiperda δ δ 2 50 , the lethal concentrations decreased with 151 − 50 = 50 H.convergens -phenothrin for days 1 to 3 (Table 4). Except at day 3 c δ b Lethal concentrations and risk quotients for , was the most susceptible species, and, based on the -phenothrin) (Table 5). The LC -phenothrin (LC maximum field rate. δ δ Hippodamia convergens = A. domesticus for -phenothrin are inherently more toxic to -phenothrin. δ 2 δ -Phenothrin commerc Resmethrin commercial maximum field rate EEC − δ -Phenothrin 3 151.94 91.99–294.3 -Phenothrin -Phenothrin 2 165.02 107.55–309.14 For The results demonstrate that non-target surrogate insect For each active ingredient there was a good relationship be- δ ResmethrinResmethrinδ δ 2 3 256.67 361.65 99.77–684.57 203.98–862.8 b c a Resmethrin butoxide Treatment Day LC Table 5. (307.18–256.67 ng cm fold less than the field ratethan for the resmethrin field and rate 0.18–0.27-fold for less resmethrin and 28.29–74.91 ng cm and for Hippodamiaconvergens time, except at day 3 for domesticus results, this seems to be a good surrogate species for estimating www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/ps species representing threesensitivity to resmethrin and orders andvalues revealed families that vary in their tweentheobservedmortalityoftheinsectsandtheconcentrations used. The regression relationship explainedation 51–97% in the of models theThe for vari- all slope treatments of and thethe insect regression insects species responded relationship tested. with line increasingwere indicates generally concentration. higher how The for slopes fast 2.12 for both resmethrin and larvae had the lowestand slopes of about 0.09–0.23 for resmethrin to resmethrin and The use of surrogate speciesassess is the potential an impact of established a testing chemical on strategyhabitatofconcern.Theresultsofthisstudyindicatethatresmethrin species residing to in the and 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS most sensitive species for resmethrin (LC 3.41–16.81-fold less1.44–1.66-fold than less than the field the rate for field rate for resmethrin and cm for resmethrin, the LC than the field rate for resmethrinfield and rate 0.54–1.43-fold for less than the (74.91–28.29 ng cm for resmethrin (LC Spodoptera frugiperda phenothrin (LC than to time for resmethrin (32.08–10.95 ng cm 3 (Table 3). For

304 305 Appl Integrat J Toxicol :205–210 27 .InterceptLtd, Pesticide Bioassays :1201–1209 (2007). . [Online]. US Environ- Insecticides in Agriculture 100 :366–372 (2006). :210–218 (1996). 56 114 hnologies/analytics/statistics/ vailable: http://www.epa.gov/ :45–51 (1996). 12 Environ Toxicol Chem risk.htm [4 April 2008]. . SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC (2003). J Econ Entomol :330–338 (1999). Cambridge University Press, London, UK, :373–382 (2007). 15 3 shaaya I and Perry RY, www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/ps . [Online]. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC (2007). ders/toera :265–267 (1925). :1758–1771 (2007). . Springer, New York, NY, 261 pp. (1998). . CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 199 pp. (2007). 18 70 Environ Health Perspect Bull Environ Contam Toxicol J Am Mosq Cont Assoc Pesticides and Non-target Invertebrates Probit Analysis. :144–148 (1982). 31 chemical insecticidesChrysomelidae) against on canola. crucifer flea beetle (Coleoptera: J Econ Entomol and Environment 333 pp. (1971). Stat deposition of ultra-low volumeadulticide. malathion applied as a mosquito (2008). Wimborne, UK, 240 pp. (1989). concentrations, fate,piperonyl and butoxide after risk aerialadult ultra-low-volume mosquito assessment applications management. for of pyrethrins and Available:stat/ http://www.sas.com/tec [4 April 2008]. malathion, and permethrinmosquitoes, on and mosquitofish nontarget in seasonally invertebrates,J impounded Am wetlands. sentinel Mosq Cont Assoc assessment for West Nilemanagement. virus and insecticides used in mosquito for insecticides used in adult mosquito management. mental Protection Agency (2006).oppefed1/ecorisk A Environ Assess Manag Environ Health of deployedprotective military measures used for disease-vector management. personnel to insecticides and personal with Arthropods Deposition of malathion and permethrinultra-low on sod volume grass after applications single, Michigan. in a suburban neighborhood in PROC User’s Manual, Version 9.1 Technologies/Analytics Technical Overview of Ecological Risk Assessment 9 Peterson RKD, Macedo PA and Davis RS, A human-health risk 18 Antwi FB, Olson DL and Carey DR, Comparisons of ecorational and 17 Perry AS, Yamamoto I, I 19 20 Finney DJ, 16 Abbott WS, A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. 22 21 Williams DA, Extra-binomial variation in logistic linear models. 15 Tietze NS, Hester PG, Shaffer KR and Wakefield FT, Peridomestic 13 Jepson PC, 14 12 Schleier III JJ, Peterson RKD, Macedo PA and Brown DA, Environmental 23 Robertson JL, Russell RM, Preisler HK and Savin NE, 25 Jensen T, Lawler SP and Dritz DA, Effects of ultra-low volume pyrethrin, 10 Davis RS, Peterson RKD and Macedo PA, An ecological risk assessment 11 Macedo PA, Peterson RKD and Davis RS, Risk assessments for exposure 24 Knepper RG, Walker ED, Wagner SA, Kamrin MA and Zabik MJ, :93–120 [Online]. 97 2008 Society of Chemical Industry -phenothrin :73–98 (1992). J Assoc Off Anal δ 9 c -phenothrin. Residue Rev δ -phenothrin and its optical δ values for surrogate, non- ble: http://www.inchem.org/ JAgricEntomol ttp://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ emical Safety. World Health 50 ts/ehc/ehc/ehc092.htm [4 April . [Online]. US Environmental Pro- Resmethrins – Resmethrin, Biores- Synthetic Pyrethroids for Mosquito ion for Resmethrin. EPA 738-R-06-003. 10 . [Online]. International Programme on Chem- et al values that were estimated and what is : 300–305 50 65 :911–916 (1985). 2009; . [Online]. US Environmental Protection Agency (2002). -phenothrin and resmethrin to non-target insects www.soci.org 68 δ International ProgrammeOrganization, on 33 pp. Ch documents/ehc/ehc/ehc96.htm [4 April (1990). 2008]. Availa invertebrates in aquatic ecosystems. isomers in technical preparations and formulations. Chem methrin,Cisresmethrin. 2008]. ical Safety, Worldhttp://www.inchem.org/documen Health Organization, 32 pp. (1989). Available: tection Agency (2007). Available:health/mosquitoes/control.htm [4 h April 2008]. Control Available:pyrethroids4mosquitoes.htm [4 April 2008]. http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/mosquitoes/ [Online]. US EnvironmentalAvailable: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/ Protection [4 April Agency, 2008]. 102 pp. (2006). insecticides on(1986). non-target organisms. Environmental Health Criteria 92: Environmental Health Criteria 96: Pesticides: Mosquito Control Methods Permethrin, Resmethrin, Sumithrin: Reregistration Eligibility Decis 5 Mian LS and Mulla MS, Effects of pyrethroids insecticides on non target 3 4 6 7 8 1 Smith TM and Stratton GW, Effects of synthetic pyrethroids 2 Doi T, Sakaue S and Horiba M, Analysis of Toxicity of target terrestrial insects andestimated can environmental insecticide be concentrations comparedrisks. to with estimate Given actual the and LC currently known about the fate of resmethrin and Pest Manag Sci REFERENCES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank J Schleier and R Davis (Montana Statefor University) assistance. ThisArmed study Forces was Pest funded ManagementProtection by Board’s Research a Deployed Program, Montana War grant StateMontana Fighter from University, Agricultural Experiment and the Station. the US study. The present results provide LC after ULV application, the present resultsthe may conclusions be of Davis used to support