Problem Formulation for an Assessment of Risk to Honey Bees from Applications of Plant Protection Products to Agricultural Crops

2014 ◽  
pp. 29-44
Author(s):  
D. Fischer ◽  
A. Alix ◽  
M. Coulson ◽  
P. Delorme ◽  
T. Moriarty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bees ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Problem Formulation ◽  
Agricultural Crops

scholarly journals Protection possibilities of agricultural minor crops in the European Union: a case study of soybean, lupin and camelina

2019 ◽  
Vol 127 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewa Matyjaszczyk
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Active Substance ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Agricultural Crops ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Minor Crops ◽  
Chemical Products

Abstract In the central part of the European Union soybean, lupin and camelina are minor agricultural crops. The paper presents analysis of plant protection products availability for those crops in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Holland, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. Data from year 2019 show that availability of products is generally insufficient. For camelina in some countries, there are no chemical products available whatsoever. For lupin and soybean, there are not always products available to control some pest groups. However, the products on the market differ significantly among the member states. The results show that in protection of soybean, lupin and camelina, no single active substance is registered for the same crop in all the analysed member states. In very numerous cases, active substance is registered in one out of eight analysed member states only.

scholarly journals Inert agricultural spray adjuvants may increase the adverse effects of selected insecticides on honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) under laboratory conditions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Wernecke ◽  
Jakob H. Eckert ◽  
Rolf Forster ◽  
Nils Kurlemann ◽  
Richard Odemer
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bees ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Proportional Hazard ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazard ◽  
Lambda Cyhalothrin ◽  
Test Guideline ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

Abstract Currently, more than 350 spray adjuvants are registered in Germany (January 2021). Unlike plant protection products (PPPs), adjuvants are not subjected to regulatory risk assessment. In practice, numerous combinations of PPPs and adjuvants are therefore possible. Thus, tank mixtures containing insecticides that are classified as nonhazardous to bees and approved for use in bee attractive crops may raise pollinator safety concerns when mixed with efficacy increasing adjuvants. This study analyzes whether selected “PPP-adjuvant” combinations result in increased mortality and pose an elevated risk to honey bees. To answer this question, we chose six common spray adjuvants of different classes for laboratory screening. These were then tested in a total of 30 tank mixtures, each with a neonicotinoid (acetamiprid), pyrethroid (lambda-cyhalothrin), diamide (chlorantraniliprole), carbamate (pirimicarb), and butenolide (flupyradifurone) formulation. We followed OECD test guideline 214 (acute contact test) but adopted the use of a professional spray chamber for more realistic exposures. Our results showed that, in total, 50% of all combinations significantly reduced the lifespan of caged honey bees in comparison to individual application of insecticides. In contrast, none of the adjuvants alone affected bee mortality (Cox proportional hazard model, p > 0.05). With four of the five insecticide formulations, the organosilicone surfactant Break-Thru® S 301 significantly increased bee mortality within 72 h (for all insecticides except chlorantraniliprole). Furthermore, acetamiprid yielded the highest and second-highest mortality increases from a tank mixture with the crop oil surfactants LI-700 (hazard ratio = 28.84, p < 0.05) and Break-Thru® S 301 (hazard ratio = 14.66, p < 0.05), respectively. In the next step, field trials should be performed to provide a more realistic exposure scenario under colony conditions to verify these findings.

STRESS REACTION OF AGRICULTURAL CROPS ON CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL PESTICIDES

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
V.A Korobov ◽  
◽  
D.O. Morozov ◽  
V.V. Bukreev ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Field Experiments ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Stress ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Close Correlation ◽  
Crop Productivity ◽  
Agricultural Crops ◽  
Stress Reactions ◽  
Chemical Pesticides ◽  
Moderate Stress

A comparative assessment of the stress reactions of potato, soybean, corn, barley, table beet, sunflower, cucumber, tomato, zucchini, pumpkin on the use of chemical and biological pesticides in field experiments was carried out. It was found that soy, barley and table beet showed a strong stress response to chemical pesticides.Biological pesticides separately and in combination with chemical plant protection products caused mild and moderate stress in the studied cultures.A close correlation was revealed between plant stress from chemical pesticides and changes in crop productivity.

scholarly journals Effects of Plant Protection Products on Biochemical Markers in Honey Bees

Agriculture ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 648
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Murawska ◽  
Paweł Migdał ◽  
Adam Roman
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bees ◽  
Semen Quality ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Ornamental Plants ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Sublethal Dose ◽  
Cytochrome P450 Monooxygenases ◽  
Biochemical Effect ◽  
Behavior Understanding ◽  
P450 Monooxygenases

Plant protection products (PPPs) are pesticides that protect crops and ornamental plants. PPPs include primarily insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides. Bees’ contact with PPPs can cause immediate death or, in sublethal dose, may affect their physiology and/or behavior. Understanding the effect of PPPs’ sublethal doses is especially important. Contact with a sublethal dose of PPPs generally allows the bee to return to the hive, which may expose the whole colony to the harmful substance. Biochemical changes may affect colony condition, health, and performance. Most of the research on the biochemical effects of PPP in honey bees focuses on insecticides and among them neonicotinoids (especially imidacloprid). The vast majority of research is carried out on Apis mellifera workers. A small part of the research has been conducted on drones and queens. Pesticides, including fungicides and herbicides, may alter antioxidant defense, detoxification, gene expression, and immune response of the bee. They affect the drones’ semen quality and metabolic rate of the queen. In this review, the biochemical effect of PPP products in the honey bee was examined, with a focus on the effect on cytochrome P450 monooxygenases, glutathione transferases, and carboxylesterases, which take part in toxin metabolism or the detoxification process. PPPs effects on the activity of glutathione peroxidase (GPX), catalase (CAT), superoxide dismutase (SOD), proteases, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and phenoloxidase (PO) are also presented.

scholarly journals Enhancing the Biodiversity of Insects Pollinators through Flowering Grass Strips

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanko Dimitrov ◽  
Nedyalka Palagacheva ◽  
Rositsa Mladenova ◽  
Plamen Zorovski ◽  
Stoyan Georgiev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Apis Mellifera ◽  
Major Part ◽  
Food Source ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Agricultural Practice ◽  
Agricultural Crops ◽  
Agricultural Areas ◽  
Anthidium Manicatum

The extensive use of plant protection products in agricultural practice and obtaining high and top quality yields results in decline of a major part of the natural regulators and the insects-pollinators. The reduction in their numbers in agricultural areas poses a threat for the pollination of entomophilous plants on global scale. The objective of this study was to establish areas of flowering varieties of grass mixes, ensuring proper habitats and food source for the pollinators of agricultural crops. The tests showed that the plant varieties in the grass mixes blossomed in the period April to June (1.5-2 months), providing varying species of pollinators, depending on the plants species. In the different-coloured layers of the grass mixtures: white, purple and yellow, the following pollinators were determined: Apis mellifera L., Megachile sp., Halictus scabiosae Rossi, Lasioglossum xanthopus Kirby, Melita leporita, Andrena flavipes Panzer., Macropis europaeae Warn., Anthidium manicatum L., Ceratina cucurbitina Rossi and Ceratina sp.

scholarly journals Inert agricultural spray adjuvants may increase the adverse effects of selected insecticides on honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) under laboratory conditions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Wernecke ◽  
Jakob H. Eckert ◽  
Rolf Forster ◽  
Nils Kurlemann ◽  
Richard Odemer
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bees ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Application Rate ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Proportional Hazard ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazard ◽  
Lambda Cyhalothrin ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

AbstractCurrently, more than 360 spray adjuvants are registered in Germany (September 2021). Unlike plant protection products (PPPs), adjuvants are not subjected to regulatory risk assessment. In practice, numerous combinations of PPPs and adjuvants are therefore possible. Thus, tank mixtures containing insecticides that are classified as non-hazardous to bees up to the highest approved application rate or concentration may raise pollinator safety concerns when mixed with efficacy increasing adjuvants and applied in bee-attractive crops. This study analyzes whether selected “PPP–adjuvant” combinations result in increased contact mortality and pose an elevated risk to honey bees. To answer this question, we chose six common spray adjuvants of different classes for laboratory screening. These were then tested in a total of 30 tank mixtures, each with a neonicotinoid (acetamiprid), pyrethroid (lambda-cyhalothrin), diamide (chlorantraniliprole), carbamate (pirimicarb), and butenolide (flupyradifurone) formulation. We adapted an acute contact test (OECD Test Guideline 214) to our needs, e.g., by using a professional spray chamber for more realistic exposures. Our results showed that, in total, 50% of all combinations significantly increased the mortality of caged honey bees in comparison with individual application of insecticides. In contrast, none of the adjuvants alone affected bee mortality (Cox proportional hazard model, p > 0.05). With four of the five insecticide formulations, the organosilicone surfactant Break-Thru® S 301 significantly increased bee mortality within 72 h (for all insecticides except chlorantraniliprole). Furthermore, acetamiprid yielded the highest and second highest mortality increases from a tank mixture with the crop oil surfactant LI 700® (hazard ratio = 28.84, p < 0.05) and the organosilicone Break-Thru® S 301 (hazard ratio = 14.66, p < 0.05), respectively. To assess risk in a more field-realistic setting, field trials should be performed to provide a more realistic exposure scenario under colony conditions.

scholarly journals Mineral nutrition in the cultivation of agricultural crops in the crop rotation

2020 ◽  
pp. 34-36
Author(s):  
Andrey Vladimirovich Panfilov ◽  
Vladimir Petrovich Belogolovtsev ◽  
Valery Genadievih Popov ◽  
Lyusya Aleksandrovna Ter-Sarkisova ◽  
Evgeny Nikolaevich Martynov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mineral Nutrition ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Agricultural Crops ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Wind Speeds ◽  
High Yields ◽  
Fertilizer System ◽  
Irrigated Soils

The article deals with the production of crops in agriculture using mineral nutrition. A fertilizer system that provides high-quality crop yields with the lowest cost per unit of production, steadily increases the fertility of irrigated soils. When developing the issue of crop planning, it is important to establish scientifically based doses of fertilizers. Stable yields of alfalfa are possible under the conditions of irrigation, fertilizers, plant protection products – a high crop of agriculture. An important stabilizing factor in crop irrigation is forest strips that allow you to maintain the timing of irrigation at wind speeds exceeding the permissible values for sprinklers. Optimal seeding rates and design of forest strips for obtaining high yields of alfalfa on irrigation have been established.

scholarly journals THE POSSIBILITY OF USING GREEN ALGAE AS FERTILIZER IN AGRICULTURE

REPORTS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 335 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-23
Author(s):  
A.Ye. Tleukeyeva ◽  
N.N. Alibayev ◽  
R. Pankiewicz ◽  
A. U. Issayeva
Keyword(s):  
Green Algae ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Economic Effect ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Mineral Fertilizers ◽  
Agricultural Crops ◽  
Green Microalgae ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Low Toxicity ◽  
Modern Technologies

The article presents the results of algological studies of the Koshkar-ata river and the influence of green microalgae on the physiological development of various agricultural crops. Modern technologies for the production of agricultural products, based on the widespread use of pesticides and mineral fertilizers, made it possible to largely solve the problem of providing the population with food, and at the same time gave rise to multiple environmental, medical and environmental problems, problems of ecologically clean and biologically valuable food products, land rehabilitation, restoration their fertility, etc. Therefore, the emergence of new classes of pesticides with different mechanisms of action, high selectivity and low toxicity for warm-blooded animals is very modern. Currently, the development and application of new plant protection products that are not toxic to humans and animals is of global importance. Priority is given to research aimed at creating plant protection products based on microorganisms and their metabolites, as well as searching for plant substances with potential pesticidal activity. In this regard, the question arose of finding new safe fertilizers that could also be economically viable for production on an industrial scale. One of the current trends in this industry is the use of green microalgae. It was found that the use of a suspension of microalgae on various agricultural crops increased the yield of winter wheat by 30%, beans by 28%, mung bean by 15%. Thus, the use of a suspension of green algae in agriculture saves on the use of fertilizers, due to a one-time application of the crop to the soil. Moreover, seed treatment with a suspension of green microalgae protects against decay. The main economic effect is achieved by increasing the yield by 20-25%.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document