4.1 Article

Acute toxicity test of agricultural pesticides on silver catfish (Rhamdia quelen) fingerlings

Journal

CIENCIA RURAL
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages 1050-1055

Publisher

UNIV FEDERAL SANTA MARIA
DOI: 10.1590/S0103-84782008000400022

Keywords

bioassay; toxicity; pesticides; LC50; Rhamdia quelen

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Toxicity risks of agricultural pesticides to fishes are pivotal. Currently, many questions remain unsolved regarding to the toxicity of commonly used pesticides to silver catfish (Rhamdia quelen), a South American catfish. The present studies have been designed to investigate the acute toxicity and the lethal concentration (LC50) of four herbicides, two fungicides and two insecticides to silver catfish fingerlings. All experiments were carried out in triplicates, in a static bioassay system, using commercially available pesticides. The data was analyzed through the Trimmed Spearman-Karber method available from the Environmental Protection Agency. The 96hLC(50) and 95% lower and upper confidence limits, respectively, for the following pesticides were determined: glyphosate (7.3mg L-1; 6.5-8.3), atrazine (10.2mg L-1; 9.1-11.5), atrazine+simazine (10.5mg L-1; 8.9-12.4), mesotrione (532.0mg L-1; 476.5-594), tebuconazole (5.3mg L-1; 4.9-5.7), methylparathion (4.8mg L-1; 4.3-5.3), strobulurin and triazol (9.9mg L-1; 8.7-11.2). Diflubenzuron was also tested and caused no fish mortality up to 1g L-1. The toxic concentration of these pesticides to silver catfish fingerlings fell above the concentration used for application in the field and, except following accidental application or misplacing of empty recipients, it should not cause fish mortality. Nonetheless, the data obtained will be useful to study the long-term effect of these products on the hematological, biochemical, hormonal and immunological parameters of silver catfish and related fish species in South Brazil.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available