Literature DB >> 17588646

Mitigation strategies to reduce pesticide inputs into ground- and surface water and their effectiveness; a review.

Stefan Reichenberger1, Martin Bach, Adrian Skitschak, Hans-Georg Frede.   

Abstract

In this paper, the current knowledge on mitigation strategies to reduce pesticide inputs into surface water and groundwater, and their effectiveness when applied in practice is reviewed. Apart from their effectiveness in reducing pesticide inputs into ground- and surface water, the mitigation measures identified in the literature are evaluated with respect to their practicability. Those measures considered both effective and feasible are recommended for implementing at the farm and catchment scale. Finally, recommendations for modelling are provided using the identified reduction efficiencies. Roughly 180 publications directly dealing with or being somehow related to mitigation of pesticide inputs into water bodies were examined. The effectiveness of grassed buffer strips located at the lower edges of fields has been demonstrated. However, this effectiveness is very variable, and the variability cannot be explained by strip width alone. Riparian buffer strips are most probably much less effective than edge-of-field buffer strips in reducing pesticide runoff and erosion inputs into surface waters. Constructed wetlands are promising tools for mitigating pesticide inputs via runoff/erosion and drift into surface waters, but their effectiveness still has to be demonstrated for weakly and moderately sorbing compounds. Subsurface drains are an effective mitigation measure for pesticide runoff losses from slowly permeable soils with frequent waterlogging. For the pathways drainage and leaching, the only feasible mitigation measures are application rate reduction, product substitution and shift of the application date. There are many possible effective measures of spray drift reduction. While sufficient knowledge exists for suggesting default values for the efficiency of single drift mitigation measures, little information exists on the effect of the drift reduction efficiency of combinations of measures. More research on possible interactions between different drift mitigation measures and the resulting overall drift reduction efficiency is therefore indicated. Point-source inputs can be mitigated against by increasing awareness of the farmers with regard to pesticide handling and application, and encouraging them to implement loss-reducing measures of "best management practice". In catchments dominated by diffuse inputs at least in some years, mitigation of point-source inputs alone may not be sufficient to reduce pesticide loads/concentrations in water bodies to an acceptable level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17588646     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.04.046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  36 in total

1.  Pesticide pressure and fish farming in barrage pond in northeastern France. Part III: how management can affect pesticide profiles in edible fish?

Authors:  Angélique Lazartigues; Damien Banas; Cyril Feidt; Jean Brun-Bellut; Jean-Noël Gardeur; Yves Le Roux; Marielle Thomas
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2012-03-31       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Pesticide authorization in the EU-environment unprotected?

Authors:  Sebastian Stehle; Ralf Schulz
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-08-15       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Experiments in water-macrophyte systems to uncover the dynamics of pesticide mitigation processes in vegetated surface waters/streams.

Authors:  Christoph Stang; Nikita Bakanov; Ralf Schulz
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Unit Process Wetlands for Removal of Trace Organic Contaminants and Pathogens from Municipal Wastewater Effluents.

Authors:  Justin T Jasper; Mi T Nguyen; Zackary L Jones; Niveen S Ismail; David L Sedlak; Jonathan O Sharp; Richard G Luthy; Alex J Horne; Kara L Nelson
Journal:  Environ Eng Sci       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.907

5.  Drainage discharge impacts on hydrology and water quality of receiving streams in the wheatbelt of Western Australia.

Authors:  Riasat Ali; Richard Silberstein; John Byrne; Geoff Hodgson
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 2.513

6.  Agricultural insecticides threaten surface waters at the global scale.

Authors:  Sebastian Stehle; Ralf Schulz
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Watershed-scale assessment of oil palm cultivation impact on water quality and nutrient fluxes: a case study in Sumatra (Indonesia).

Authors:  Irina Comte; François Colin; Olivier Grünberger; Joann K Whalen; Rudi Harto Widodo; Jean-Pierre Caliman
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 4.223

8.  Using fluorescent dyes as proxies to study herbicide removal by sorption in buffer zones.

Authors:  Jeanne Dollinger; Cécile Dagès; Marc Voltz
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 4.223

9.  Is pesticide sorption by constructed wetland sediments governed by water level and water dynamics?

Authors:  Céline Gaullier; Sylvie Dousset; David Billet; Nicole Baran
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-05-15       Impact factor: 4.223

10.  Mitigation of polar pesticides across a vegetative filter strip. A mesocosm study.

Authors:  Jorge Franco; Víctor Matamoros
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-10-02       Impact factor: 4.223

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.