Literature DB >> 12009994

Environmental fate of spinosad. 1. Dissipation and degradation in aqueous systems.

Cheryl B Cleveland1, Gary A Bormett, Donald G Saunders, Fred L Powers, Alec S McGibbon, Graham L Reeves, Laura Rutherford, Jesse L Balcer.   

Abstract

Spinosad is a bacterially derived insect control agent consisting of two active compounds, spinosyns A and D. The objective of this paper is to describe the environmental fate of spinosad in aquatic systems. To this end, several studies performed to meet regulatory requirements are used to study the fate and degradation in individual environmental media. Specifically, investigations of abiotic (hydrolysis and photolysis) and biotic (aerobic and anaerobic aquatic) processes are described. Understanding developed from the laboratory-based studies has been tested and augmented by an outdoor microcosm study. Understanding of aquatic fate is a building block for a complete environmental safety assessment of spinosad products (Cleveland, C. B.; Mayes, M. A.; Cryer, S. A. Pest Manag. Sci. 2001, 58, 70-84). From individual investigations, the following understanding of dissipation emerges: (1) Aqueous photolysis of spinosad is rapid (observed half-lives of <1 up to 2 days in summer sunlight) and will be the primary route of degradation in aquatic systems exposed to sunlight. (2) Biotic transformations contribute to spinosad's dissipation, but less so than photolysis; they will be of primary importance only in the absence of light. (3) Spinosad partitions rapidly (within a few days) from water to organic matter and soil/sediment in aquatic systems but not so rapidly as to replace sunlight as the primary route of dissipation. (4) Abiotic hydrolysis is relatively unimportant compared to other dissipation routes, except under highly basic (artificial) conditions and even then observed half-lives are approximately 8 months. Degradation pathways are understood are follows: (1) Degradation primarily proceeds by loss of the forosamine sugar and reduction of the 13,14-bond on the macrolide ring under aqueous photolytic conditions. (2) Degradation to several other compounds occurs through biotic degradation. Degradation under anaerobic conditions primarily involves changes and substitutions in the rhamnose ring, eventually followed by complete loss of the rhamnose ring. Degradation under aerobic conditions was more extensive (to smaller compounds) with the loss of both the forosamine and rhamnose sugars to diketone spinosyn aglycon degradates. (3) Hydrolytic degradation involves loss of the forosamine sugar and water and reduction on the macrolide ring to a double bond at the 16,17-position.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12009994     DOI: 10.1021/jf011663i

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Agric Food Chem        ISSN: 0021-8561            Impact factor:   5.279


  12 in total

1.  Residues, dissipation, and risk assessment of spinosad in cowpea under open field conditions.

Authors:  Zhibo Huan; Jinhui Luo; Zhi Xu; Defang Xie
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Dissipation kinetics of spinosad from tomato under sub-tropical agro-climatic conditions.

Authors:  Totan Adak; Irani Mukherjee
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2016-04-19       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Population-level effects of spinosad and Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis in Daphnia pulex and Daphnia magna: comparison of laboratory and field microcosm exposure conditions.

Authors:  Claire Duchet; Marie-Agnès Coutellec; Evelyne Franquet; Christophe Lagneau; Laurent Lagadic
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 2.823

4.  Low doses of the organic insecticide spinosad trigger lysosomal defects, elevated ROS, lipid dysregulation, and neurodegeneration in flies.

Authors:  Felipe Martelli; Natalia H Hernandes; Zhongyuan Zuo; Julia Wang; Ching-On Wong; Nicholas E Karagas; Ute Roessner; Thusita Rupasinghe; Charles Robin; Kartik Venkatachalam; Trent Perry; Philip Batterham; Hugo J Bellen
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-02-22       Impact factor: 8.713

5.  Demonstration of an adaptive response to preconditioning Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande) to sublethal doses of spinosad: a hormetic-dose response.

Authors:  Youhui Gong; Baoyun Xu; Youjun Zhang; Xiwu Gao; Qingjun Wu
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2015-04-25       Impact factor: 2.823

6.  Integration of botanical and bacterial insecticide against Aedes aegypti and Anopheles stephensi.

Authors:  Palanisamy Mahesh Kumar; Kalimuthu Kovendan; Kadarkarai Murugan
Journal:  Parasitol Res       Date:  2012-12-16       Impact factor: 2.289

7.  Bioefficacy of larvicdial and pupicidal properties of Carica papaya (Caricaceae) leaf extract and bacterial insecticide, spinosad, against chikungunya vector, Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae).

Authors:  Kalimuthu Kovendan; Kadarkarai Murugan; Arjunan Naresh Kumar; Savariar Vincent; Jiang-Shiou Hwang
Journal:  Parasitol Res       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 2.383

8.  Comparative Proteomic Analysis of saccharopolyspora spinosa SP06081 and PR2 strains reveals the differentially expressed proteins correlated with the increase of spinosad yield.

Authors:  Yushuang Luo; Xuezhi Ding; Liqiu Xia; Fan Huang; Wenping Li; Shaoya Huang; Ying Tang; Yunjun Sun
Journal:  Proteome Sci       Date:  2011-07-16       Impact factor: 2.480

9.  The Wiggle Index: An Open Source Bioassay to Assess Sub-Lethal Insecticide Response in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Shane Denecke; Cameron J Nowell; Alexandre Fournier-Level; Trent Perry; Phil Batterham
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Efficacy and non-target impact of spinosad, Bti and temephos larvicides for control of Anopheles spp. in an endemic malaria region of southern Mexico.

Authors:  Carlos F Marina; J Guillermo Bond; José Muñoz; Javier Valle; Rodolfo Novelo-Gutiérrez; Trevor Williams
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 3.876

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.