4.7 Article

Toxicity assessment of 45 pesticides to the epigeic earthworm Eisenia fetida

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 88, Issue 4, Pages 484-491

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.02.086

Keywords

Soil invertebrate; Ecotoxicology; Fungicides; Insecticides; Herbicides

Funding

  1. International Cooperation Fund
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [S2010GR0905, 2011AA100806]
  3. Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences
  4. Chinese Academy of Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study was conducted to investigate comparative toxicity of 45 pesticides, including insecticides, acaricides, fungicides, and herbicides, toward the epigeic earthworm Eisenia fetida. Results from a 48-h filter paper contact test indicated that clothianidin, fenpyroximate, and pyridaben were supertoxic to E. fetida with LC50 values ranging from 0.28 (0.24-0.35) to 0.72 (0.60-0.94) mu g cm(-2), followed by carbaryl, pyridaphenthion, azoxystrobin, cyproconazole, and picoxystrobin with LC50 values ranging from 2.72 (2.22-0.3.19) to 8.48 (7.38-10.21) mu g cm(-2), while the other pesticides ranged from being relatively nontoxic to very toxic to the worms. When tested in artificial soil for 14 d, clothianidin and picoxystrobin showed the highest intrinsic toxicity against E. fetida, and their LC50 values were 6.06 (5.60-6.77) and 7.22 (5.29-8.68) mg kg(-1), respectively, followed by fenpyroximate with an LC50 of 75.52 (68.21-86.57) mg kg(-1). However, the herbicides fluoroglycofen, paraquat, and pyraflufen-ethyl exhibited the lowest toxicities with LC50 values > 1000 mg kg(-1). In contrast, the other pesticides exhibited relatively low toxicities with LC50 values ranging from 133.5 (124.5-150.5) to 895.2 (754.2-1198.0) mg kg(-1). The data presented in this paper provided useful information for evaluating the potential risk of these chemicals to soil invertebrates. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available