4.2 Review

Temporal trends in organophosphorus pesticides use and concentrations in river water in Japan, and risk assessment

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Volume 79, Issue -, Pages 135-152

Publisher

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.jes.2018.11.019

Keywords

Organophosphorus; Pesticide residue; Risk quotient; Hazard quotient; Japan; Water

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)
  2. JSPS KAKENHI, Japan [16KT0149]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16KT0149] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We reviewed organophosphorus pesticide use in Japan between 1982 and 2016 using data from the National Institute of Environmental Studies. Organophosphorus pesticide concentrations in river water throughout Japan were taken from the literature, and risk assessments were performed for some organophosphorus pesticides based on risk quotients and hazard quotients. Assessments were performed for 20 common pesticides, including insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides. The amounts used decreased in the order insecticides > herbicides > fungicides. Organophosphorus insecticide and fungicide use have decreased over the last four decades, but organophosphorus herbicide use has increased. During this period, annual organophosphorus pesticide use was the highest for chlorpyrifos (105,263 tons/year) and the lowest for glyphosate-sodium (8 tons/year). The ecotoxicological risk assessment indicated that diazinon and fenitrothion posed strong risks to the Japanese aquatic environment, and chlorpyrifos and malathion have moderate risks. None of the pesticides that were assessed posed significant risks to humans. Continued use of organophosphorus pesticides in Japan may cause strong risks to aquatic environments. These risks should be reassessed periodically. (C) 2018 The Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available