Comparing the acute and chronic toxicity of flupyradifurone and imidacloprid to non-target aquatic arthropod species.
Butenolide insecticide
Neonicotinoids
Sublethal effect
TKTD
Journal
Ecotoxicology and environmental safety
ISSN: 1090-2414
Titre abrégé: Ecotoxicol Environ Saf
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7805381
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Sep 2022
15 Sep 2022
Historique:
received:
03
05
2022
revised:
03
08
2022
accepted:
13
08
2022
pubmed:
20
8
2022
medline:
9
9
2022
entrez:
19
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Flupyradifurone (FPF) is a new type of butenolide insecticide. It was launched on the market in 2015 and is considered an alternative to the widely used neonicotinoids, like imidacloprid (IMI), some of which are banned from outdoor use in the European Union. FPF is claimed to be safe for bees, but its safety for aquatic organisms is unknown. Its high water solubility, persistence in the environment, and potential large-scale use make it urgent to evaluate possible impacts on aquatic systems. The current study assessed the acute and chronic toxicity of FPF for aquatic arthropod species and compared these results with those of imidacloprid. Besides, toxicokinetics and toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic models were used to understand the mechanisms of the toxicity of FPF. The present study results showed that organisms take up FPF slower than IMI and eliminate it faster. In addition, the hazardous concentration 5th percentiles (HC
Identifiants
pubmed: 35985198
pii: S0147-6513(22)00817-X
doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2022.113977
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Insecticides
0
Neonicotinoids
0
Nitro Compounds
0
Pyridines
0
Water Pollutants, Chemical
0
imidacloprid
3BN7M937V8
flupyradifurone
8H7JT159D0
4-Butyrolactone
OL659KIY4X
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
113977Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.