Summary of safety evaluation toxicity studies of glufosinate ammonium

Ebert, Eugen; Leist, Karl-Heinz; Mayer, Dieter

doi:10.1016/0278-6915(90)90108-y

Cited by 92 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The lowest NOEL (no observed effect level), established in a chronic (24 months) feeding study in rats, was 2 mg glufosinate-ammonium/kg body weight/day (Ebert et al, 1990). This low toxicity is due to the mode of action of glufosinate.…”

Section: Sugar Beetmentioning

confidence: 84%

Evaluation of WideStrike Cotton Response to Repeated Applications of Glufosinate at Various Application Timings

Barnett

Culpepper²,

York

et al. 2015

Weed technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds are most challenging for growers to control in cotton in the midsouth region of the United States. As a result, growers in these states are transitioning from a glyphosate-based system to a glufosinate-based system. A field study was conducted in 2010 and 2011 in Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee to determine the effect of repeated glufosinate applications to WideStrike cotton applied at various application timings. One to three glufosinate applications at 594 g ai ha−1were applied to cotton at the two-leaf, seven-leaf, bloom, or 2 wk after bloom stages. Visual estimates of crop injury were evaluated after each application, in addition to crop height, development, and yield. Crop injury after each glufosinate application typically ranged from 3 to 11%, with higher injury observed where multiple glufosinate applications were made. Crop height differences were noted after the bloom and 2 wk after bloom applications. Treatments that had one, two, or three glufosinate applications had reduced crop height when compared with the weed-free control. Node above cracked boll ratings also indicated that glufosinate treatments may have stressed the cotton. Ultimately, yield was reduced where three glufosinate treatments were applied to WideStrike cotton. In addition, one glufosinate application at the bloom stage or two glufosinate applications at the bloom and 2 wk after bloom stages reduced yield when compared with the weed-free control. Although it is a legal application, growers should use caution when applying glufosinate to WideStrike cotton because the manufacturer of glufosinate and the manufacturer of WideStrike cotton do not recommend this application. However, where GR Palmer amaranth is present, these applications may be necessary.

show abstract

Section: Sugar Beetmentioning

confidence: 84%

Evaluation of WideStrike Cotton Response to Repeated Applications of Glufosinate at Various Application Timings

Barnett

Culpepper²,

York

et al. 2015

Weed technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, a recent review of the health effects of glufosinate concluded that it has no teratogenic, mutagenic, or carcinogenic potential (52).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paternal exposure to pesticides and congenital malformations

García¹,

Benavides²,

Fletcher³

et al. 1998

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Garcia AM, Benavides FG, Fletcher T, Orts E. Paternal exposure to pesticides and congenital malformations Scand J Work Environ Health 1998;24(6):473-480.Objectives A case-referent study with 261 matched pairs was carried out in 8 hospitals of Comunidad Valenciana, Spain, to assess the relation between occupatioilal cxposure to pesticides and selccted congenital malfor~nations. In this paper, the rcsults concerning patcnlal exposure are presented. MethodsThe parents of the case patients and the referents were interviewed to collect inforination about exposure to pesticides and potential confounding variables. Detailed information on direct involve~nent in the handling of pesticides was collected for the interviewees involved in agricultural activities during a previously defined period in relation to conception and pregnancy. Exposure data were reviewed by 2 experts who assigned ordinal scores for the probability and intensity of exposure to pesticide classes and active ingredients. ResultsThe dichotoinous analysis of exposure (absent, present) yiclded some increased risks, although not statistically significant, for aliphatic hydrocarbons [adjusted odds ratio (adjusted OR) 2.05, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.62-6.801, inorganic compounds (adjusted OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.53-7.72), and glufosinate (adjusted OR 2.45, 95% CI 0.78-7.70), and a significant association for pyridil derivatives (adjusted OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.19-6.44). The analysis bascd on the experts' scores (2 levels of exposure) showed some consistent associations for these compounds.C O~~~U S~O~S This research indicates a possible risk of congenital malformations for paternal exposure to some pesticides, notably, pyridils, aliphatic hydrocarbons, inorganic compounds, and glufosinate. It did not find an increased risk for paternal exposure to pesticides in the classes of organophosphates, carbamates, organochlorines, chloroalkylthio fungicides and organosulfurs. These findings warrant further investigation.

show abstract

“…The toxicology of t-Pt has been intensively analyzed (Lejczak et al, 1981;Lacoste et al, 1985;Dom et al, 1986;Logusch et al, 1989) and was summarized by Ebert et al (1990). It is safe under the conditions of recommended use, but, according to European Economic Community directive 83/467/EEC, it has to be classified as harmful on the basis of testing for acute oral toxicity (Ebert et al, 1990).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%