Adverse Outcome Pathway and Risks of Anticoagulant Rodenticides to Predatory Wildlife

Abstract

The NERC and CEH trademarks and logos ('the Trademarks') are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner. ARs in the U.S. in 1997, 3 (ii) a market analysis suggesting that U. ADVERSE OUTCOME PATHWAY FOR ANTICOAGULANT RODENTICIDES 60An AOP is a conceptual framework portraying existing knowledge as a logical sequence of 61 processes linking a direct molecular initiating event to an adverse effect across multiple levels of 62 biological organization, which is relevant in risk assessment. [17][18][19] In an ecological context, warfarin resistance is at Y139; common mutations include substitutions of S, C, and F, for Y. 119Other common mutations that afford warfarin resistance are indicated in yellow. 9 FGARs (warfarin, chlorophacinone) exceeded levels of concern for non-target birds and 296 mammals. Consumption of SGAR-exposed prey also exceeded levels of concern for predatory 297 birds and mammals. While consumption of FGAR-exposed prey posed a hazard for non-target 298 mammals, levels of concern were rarely exceeded for birds. 4 In some use scenarios (e.g., 299Rozol® for control of prairie dogs, Cynomys ludovicianus), label requirements even state that 300 applicators must make multiple follow-up visits after application to remove dead or dying target 301 species to mitigate hazard to non-target scavengers and predators. 86 UNSOLVED ISSUES 380There are significant unknowns related to exposure and effects to predatory wildlife associated 381 with use of ARs. Among these are basic and applied data needs to supplement risk assessments. 382Some of these data are best derived from controlled exposure trials using captive animals, while 383 other information can only be generated from field observations and hypothesis-driven eco-384 epidemiological studies, and even a combination of these activities. Exposure pathways can be complex, with non-target predators encountering a combination 396 of ARs. Notably, tissues analyzed from mortality incidents document exposure to multiple 397 SGARs to varying degrees, 12,51,52,56,62,63,65,68,71,100 and occasionally even combinations of FGARs 398 and SGARs. 51,56 That suggests that some predators may reside and forage opportunistically at the 399 interface of urban/suburban/rural and agricultural settings. For example, rats and non-target 400 small mammals (but not house mice) exposed to SGARs while indoors may move outdoors from 419In contrast to the aforementioned terrestrial exposure pathway, there is now evidence that 420 warfarin, at nanogram per liter quantities, is detectable in some wastewater effluents. 120 Its 421 source is presumed to be of human origin. However, based on both its low concentration and log 422 K ow (2.37), it is highly unlikely that this is a significant source of exposure for predatory wildlife. hemorrhagic syndrome in chickens, and warfarin sensitivity and resistance in rats, has been 436 studied in great detail, 125 vitamin K status has not been e...

Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Cross-Species Transmission: Implications for Emergence of New Lentiviral Infections

“…Recent reports have documented mountain lion predation on bobcats and domestic cats (59, 60), a likely mechanism by which mountain lions are exposed to pathogens of sympatric felids. The relationship between predator-prey interactions and viral transmission is not well studied and may represent a process by which predators accumulate pathogens by a mechanism that is similar to the process of bioaccumulation of environmental toxins (61). For example, feline leukemia virus has spilled over from domestic cats and caused outbreaks with high morbidity in Florida panthers on multiple occasions (62,63).…”

Poisoning by Anticoagulant Rodenticides in Humans and Animals: Causes and Consequences

“…Finally, the diet is certainly going to inluence secondary exposition and species like raptors, foxes and mustelids largely feeding on rodents when abundant are consequently the most at risk, as demonstrated for the red kite (Milvus milvus) [81]. The removal of visible rodent bodies helps to reduce the risk of secondary exposition [82] but is not always possible because of landscape limited access and in the case of aerial application [1]. Mitigation measures have been considered to protect predatory species but new approaches are still required [82].…”

“…The removal of visible rodent bodies helps to reduce the risk of secondary exposition [82] but is not always possible because of landscape limited access and in the case of aerial application [1]. Mitigation measures have been considered to protect predatory species but new approaches are still required [82].…”

“…Less than 10% of exposed and dead birds have been conirmed to be intoxicated by ARs [1,87]. Currently, there are no reports of a signiicant incidence of ARs on non-targeted species populations [82]. Nevertheless, impact of ARs on wildlife has to be more monitored in order to limit the impact of rodent population management.…”

Development of an Ecofriendly Anticoagulant Rodenticide Based on the Stereochemistry of Difenacoum

“…The first commercial rodenticide was dicoumarin replaced a couple of years later by warfarin, a more efficient molecule (Hadler and Buckle, 1992). These products with coumatetralyl, chlorophacinone and other molecules developed from 1950s compose the first-generation of ARs (FGARs), which require multiple ingestions to cause death of rodents (Rattner et al, 2014).…”