A review of secondary‐poisoning studies with rodenticides

Joermann, Gerhard

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2338.1998.tb00717.x

Cited by 24 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The active ingredient in the rodenticide bait used in all trials was coumatetralyl (375 mg kg − 1 ; trade name Racumin; Bayer Environmental Science, Waltham Cross, Herts, UK), a first-generation, multiple-dose rodenticide with a half-life of 55 days in rat liver (Parmar et al . 1987) and relatively low toxicity to birds (Joermann 1998;Burn, Carter & Shore 2002). This was important because red kites (a protected species and the subject of a reintroduction programme in the UK) were present.…”

Section:  mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure of non‐target small mammals to rodenticides: short‐term effects, recovery and implications for secondary poisoning

Brakes

Smith

2005

Journal of Applied Ecology

164

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1.Monitoring of exposure to pesticides in many countries shows extensive exposure of predators to anticoagulant rodenticides, which are used to control rats. Many predators and scavengers are declining in numbers, and exposure to rodenticides might therefore be of importance in conservation biology. 2. Predators and scavengers of poisoned rats are at most risk of secondary poisoning. However, several predatory species of conservation concern rarely eat rats, implicating non-target small mammals as the major route of exposure. For the first time, this research investigated the importance of non-target small mammals as routes of exposure to rodenticide for predators and scavengers in the UK. 3. Exposure studies of non-target small mammals were carried out alongside routine rat control at five sites, around agricultural buildings ( n = 2) and feed hoppers for game birds ( n = 3). 4. Three non-target rodent species fed on rodenticide from bait boxes during routine rat control treatments. A large proportion (48·6%) of individuals in local populations ate the bait: woodmice Apodemus sylvaticus were most exposed, followed by bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus then field voles Microtus agrestis . 5. Local populations of non-target small mammals declined significantly following rodenticidal rat control but their relative proportions did not change significantly. Populations recovered partially after 3 months, depending on the time of the year relative to the breeding cycle. 6. Synthesis and applications. Our results clearly demonstrate that routine rat control reduced local populations of non-target small mammals. This may limit the food supply of some specialist predators. Most importantly, this demonstrates a significant route of exposure of predators and scavengers of small mammals to secondary poisoning. Rodenticides are applied on farms and game estates across the UK. Hence the results of this study are indicative of non-target rodenticide exposure nationally. Mitigation requires a shift from the current reliance on rodenticides to ecologically based rodent management, involving improvements in site management and the adoption of good farming practice.

show abstract

Section:  mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure of non‐target small mammals to rodenticides: short‐term effects, recovery and implications for secondary poisoning

Brakes

Smith

2005

Journal of Applied Ecology

164

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, given the persistence of rodenticides in prey and the ability for nontarget species to accumulate toxic doses over an extended period of time, many species of birds may be at significant risk with respect to anticoagulant rodenticide use. In a review of nearly 50 secondary poisoning studies with rodenticides, Joermann [19] concluded that anticoagulant rodenticides are acutely toxic. In a seven-year survey of nontarget wildlife poisonings in New York State, USA, anticoagulant rodenticide (diphacinone, chlorophacinone, brodifacoum)-poisoned birds accounted for more than half of the wildlife fatalities [20].…”

Section: Anticoagulant Rodenticide Toxicity To Birdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probabilistic risk assessment for snails, slugs, and endangered honeycreepers in diphacinone rodenticide baited areas on Hawaii, USA

Johnston

Pitt²,

Sugihara³

et al. 2005

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Three probabilistic models were developed for characterizing the risk of mortality and subacute coagulopathy to Poouli, an endangered nontarget avian species, in broadcast diphacinone-baited areas on Hawaii, USA. For single-day exposure, the risk of Poouli mortality approaches 0. For 5-d exposure, the mean probability of mortality increased to 3% for adult and 8% for juvenile Poouli populations. For Poouli that consume snails containing diphacinone residues for 14 d, the model predicted increased levels of coagulopathy for 0.42 and 11% of adult and juvenile Poouli populations, respectively. Worst-case deterministic risk characterizations predicted acceptable levels of risk for nonthreatened or endangered species such as northern bobwhite quail and mallards. Also, no acute toxicity was noted for snails and slugs that feed on diphacinone baits.

show abstract

“…(1999). For data on secondary poisoning and design of such studies, see Joermann (1998) and OEPP/EPPO (1995). A case study is described by Joermann et al .…”

Section: Explanatory Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental risk assessment scheme for plant protection products

2003

EPPO Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This standard provides an assessment of the direct risk presented by plant protection products to terrestrial vertebrates (birds and mammals), when applied as sprays, seed treatments or granular formulations. Specific approval and amendmentFirst approved in 1992-09. Edited as and EPPO Standard in 1998. Revision approved in 2002-09. IntroductionAdverse effects on birds and mammals are among the factors which most strongly influence the acceptability of a plant protection product. The greatest concern is effects at the population level. However, there is also strong public concern regarding the deaths of individual birds and mammals from the use of plant protection products, although they may not have any significant effect on the population. Partly for that reason, and because of the lack of agreed criteria for the acceptability of effects at the population level, this subscheme is concerned with the risk to individual animals. The result can also be used to provide an indication of the potential impact at the population level. ScopeThe scope of the risk assessment subscheme covered in this Chapter is the determination of direct risk of a plant protection product to non-target birds and mammals. The direct risk is defined as the risk from the product itself including exposure via treated or contaminated food. The subscheme determines the risk from primary and secondary exposure, where primary exposure is defined as direct consumption of product or of treated food, and secondary exposure is defined as consumption of food that, although not directly treated, contains the active substance (e.g. bioaccumulation in fish).Exposure by non-dietary routes is not considered by this subscheme. There is some evidence that non-dietary routes can contribute significantly to exposure in some situations (Driver et al ., 1991;Mineau et al ., 2001), but there is no generally accepted approach to assessing them and in practice they are frequently omitted from routine assessment. It would be advisable to consider assessing non-dietary routes, especially in those cases where the level of risk from dietary exposure alone is approaching an unacceptable level. Approaches to assessing non-dietary routes have not developed significantly since the previous edition of this subscheme (OEPP/EPPO, 1994) and the user is referred to that source for guidance.For some specialized products, e.g. slug pellets or rodenticides, the assessment requires some extra considerations. However, the basic concept of risk assessment is the same (processing of toxicity data, definitions of exposure-toxicity ratio, ETR). Such cases can be assessed by taking one of the modules of the subscheme (for sprayed products and seed treatments or for granular formulations) as a model and deciding on:• suitable indicator species • relevance of the three time scales • exposure model for reasonable worst-case and most likely case scenarios. With regard to rodenticides some background information is provided in Note 26.The risk assessment is done at the field scale and not lan...

show abstract

A review of secondary‐poisoning studies with rodenticides

Cited by 24 publications

References 19 publications

Exposure of non‐target small mammals to rodenticides: short‐term effects, recovery and implications for secondary poisoning

Exposure of non‐target small mammals to rodenticides: short‐term effects, recovery and implications for secondary poisoning

Probabilistic risk assessment for snails, slugs, and endangered honeycreepers in diphacinone rodenticide baited areas on Hawaii, USA

Environmental risk assessment scheme for plant protection products

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About