4.5 Article

Acute and chronic sensitivity, avoidance behavior and sensitive life stages of bullfrog tadpoles exposed to the biopesticide abamectin

Journal

ECOTOXICOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 3, Pages 500-509

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10646-015-1608-4

Keywords

Amphibians; Abamectin; Bioassays; Aquatic ecotoxicology; Environmental risk assessment; Lithobates catesbeianus

Funding

  1. Brazilian government through a PhD scholarship (CNPq)
  2. Special Visiting Researcher program (MEC/MCTI/CAPES/CNPq/FAPs) [402392/2013-2]
  3. FCT (Portugal) [SFRH/BPD/74044/2010]
  4. SENESCYT (Secretaria de Educacion Superior, Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion, Ecuador)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As compared to other aquatic organism groups, relatively few studies have been conducted so far evaluating the toxicity of pesticides to amphibians. This may at least partly be due to the fact that regulations for registering pesticides usually do not require testing amphibians. The sensitivity of amphibians is generally considered to be covered by that based on toxicity tests with other aquatic organisms (e.g. fish) although the impact of a pesticide on amphibians may be very different. In the present study, acute and chronic laboratory tests were conducted to evaluate the acute and chronic toxicity of abamectin (as Vertimec(A (R)) 18EC) to bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus) tadpoles. Acute tests were conducted at two tadpole stages (Gosner stage 21G and 25G) and avoidance tests were also conducted with stage Gosner stage 21G tadpoles. Calculated acute toxicity values were greater than those reported for standard fish test species, hence supporting the use of fish toxicity data as surrogates for amphibians in acute risk assessments. Given the limited number and extent of available amphibian toxicity studies, however, research needs to increase our understanding of pesticide toxicity to amphibians are discussed.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available