Potential Interactions of Aldicarb and Its Metabolites on Nontarget Organisms in the Environment

Spurr, H. W.; Sousa, A. A.

doi:10.2134/jeq1974.00472425000300020008x

Cited by 13 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The decrease in nematode numbers observed in cotton roots between the two seasons is consistent with the successive use of the biocide Aldicarb (Temik, Bayer Crop Science) at commercial rates of 7 kg/ha (Spurr and Sousa 1974). The wheat rotations, which preceded the 2004-05 cotton crops, did not have Aldicarb applied and (are likely to have) supported greater nematode populations.…”

supporting

confidence: 62%

Observation ofTylenchorhynchus ewingiin association with cotton soils in Australia

Knox

Anderson²,

Nehl³

et al. 2006

Austral. Plant Disease Notes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We report for the first time the recovery of the plant parasitic nematode Tylenchorhynchus ewingi Hooper 1959 from field soils used to grow irrigated cotton (Gossipium hirsutum) in New South Wales, Australia. The observation was made while investigating the possible existence of an association between nematodes and Verticillium wilt of cotton. No interaction was evident between nematode population sizes, species composition or the number of nematodes in cotton roots and the severity of Verticillium wilt. The samples collected over the course of the investigation contained few plant parasitic nematodes. Although the plant parasitic nematode population was small it was comprised almost entirely of the stunt nematode, Tylenchorhynchus ewingi. This is the first observation of this nematode in an Australian cotton production system. 150• 25.909E). Six sample sites in each field were visited at 2 days before planting, and at 64 and 146 days after planting. GPS was used to return to the same sample sites as those assessed in the previous season. Incidence of Verticillium wilt within the cotton crop was assessed at 64 and 146 days after planting. This was done by cutting the stems of 10 plants over 1 m at each sample site and assessing the cut-stem tissue for discolouration and necrosis on a scale of 0-4 as previously described (Knox et al. 2006). Soil samples were collected at each sample point by taking three cores (15 cm diameter × 20 cm deep) between the assessed plant stand on the planting hill. The three cores were pooled and returned to the laboratory for assessment. Live cotton roots were extracted from 1 kg of each soil sample, cleared and stained with acid fuchsin. Nematode occurrence and frequency in the stained roots was assessed under the dissecting microscope (× 120 magnification). Soil (150 g) from each sample was sent to Biological Crop Protection (Moggill, Queensland) where nematodes were extracted in Whitehead trays for trophic group identification.Helicotylenchus dihystera was not observed in any of the Whitehead tray assayed soil samples, even though it had been isolated from the roots of cotton at the upper Namoi site in the previous season (Knox et al. 2006). Plant parasitic nematodes accounted for only 3% of the total nematode population recovered from soil and was mostly comprised of a stunt nematode, later identified as Tylenchorhynchus ewingi

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 62%

Observation ofTylenchorhynchus ewingiin association with cotton soils in Australia

Knox

Anderson²,

Nehl³

et al. 2006

Austral. Plant Disease Notes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Over half of the studies shown in Table 2 were conducted on dipterans as model organisms, with considerable focus on species with aquatic phases during development such as mosquitoes (e.g., [ 11 , 84 , 132 ]). Of all the toxicants reviewed, the only group without studies in aquatic environments is the carbamate cholinesterase inhibitors, a group of organic compounds derived from carbamic acid (NH 2 COOH) found in broad-spectrum pesticides (e.g., [ 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 ]). Despite the concern raised about carbamides and their effects on human health [ 36 , 140 ], this group is one of the least studied regarding their effect on biodiversity, including arthropods [ 141 ].…”

Section: Epigenetic Molecular Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insect Epigenetic Mechanisms Facing Anthropogenic-Derived Contamination, an Overview

Olivares-Castro

Cáceres-Jensen

Guerrero-Bosagna

et al. 2021

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, the human species has been recognized as the primary species responsible for Earth’s biodiversity decline. Contamination by different chemical compounds, such as pesticides, is among the main causes of population decreases and species extinction. Insects are key for ecosystem maintenance; unfortunately, their populations are being drastically affected by human-derived disturbances. Pesticides, applied in agricultural and urban environments, are capable of polluting soil and water sources, reaching non-target organisms (native and introduced). Pesticides alter insect’s development, physiology, and inheritance. Recently, a link between pesticide effects on insects and their epigenetic molecular mechanisms (EMMs) has been demonstrated. EMMs are capable of regulating gene expression without modifying genetic sequences, resulting in the expression of different stress responses as well as compensatory mechanisms. In this work, we review the main anthropogenic contaminants capable of affecting insect biology and of triggering EMMs. EMMs are involved in the development of several diseases in native insects affected by pesticides (e.g., anomalous teratogenic reactions). Additionally, EMMs also may allow for the survival of some species (mainly pests) under contamination-derived habitats; this may lead to biodiversity decline and further biotic homogenization. We illustrate these patterns by reviewing the effect of neonicotinoid insecticides, insect EMMs, and their ecological consequences.

show abstract

“…The reported toxic metabolites of aldicarb are aldicarb sulfoxide and aldicarb sulfone (A2) (Union Carbide Corp., 1970;Spurr and Sousa, 1974). The detoxification potential of the fungi was determined by calculating the total toxic compounds remaining at the end of the incubation period.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metabolism of aldicarb by five soil fungi

Jones¹

1976

J. Agric. Food Chem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential Interactions of Aldicarb and Its Metabolites on Nontarget Organisms in the Environment

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Observation ofTylenchorhynchus ewingiin association with cotton soils in Australia

Observation ofTylenchorhynchus ewingiin association with cotton soils in Australia

Insect Epigenetic Mechanisms Facing Anthropogenic-Derived Contamination, an Overview

Metabolism of aldicarb by five soil fungi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About