Ecotoxicidade do herbicida isoxaflutole para invertebrados do solo

Fernanda Benedet de Santo, Guilherme Alves Ramos, Altair Maçaneiro Ricardo Filho, Cesar Augusto Marchioro, Júlia Carina Niemeyer

Resumo


Isoxaflutole (IFT) é um herbicida utilizado para o controle em pré-emergência de uma ampla variedade de plantas daninhas de folha larga e gramíneas, especialmente quando há resistência a outros herbicidas, como glyphosate e atrazine. Apesar de seu potencial como herbicida ter sido identificado no início dos anos 90, IFT ainda é considerado um ingrediente ativo novo no Brasil e pouco se sabe sobre seus efeitos, principalmente acerca da ecotoxicidade dos produtos formulados para grupos da macro e mesofauna do solo. Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar efeitos comportamentais, agudos e crônicos (fuga, letalidade e reprodução) do produto comercial Provence® 750 WG (750 g i.a. L-1 isoxaflutole) nos organismos de teste Eisenia andrei (minhoca) e Folsomia candida (colêmbolo) usando normas padronizadas ISO. Os resultados mostraram que as minhocas apresentam comportamento de fuga apenas em doses >300 vezes a dose de campo e redução na reprodução em doses >150 vezes a dose de campo. Para os colêmbolos não foi obtida resposta de fuga, letalidade ou reprodução nas doses avaliadas. A partir dos resultados de laboratório, presume-se que o produto comercial Provence® não apresenta toxicidade para minhocas e colêmbolos, mesmo em doses muito acima à dose de campo, garantindo a segurança das comunidades do solo.


Palavras-chave


agrotóxicos, ecotoxicologia terrestre, minhocas, teste de fuga.

Texto completo:

PDF (English)

Referências


AGUIAR LM et al. 2016. Glyphosate based herbicide exposure causes antioxidant defence responses in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C: Toxicology & Pharmacology 185-186: 94-101.

AMORIM MJ et al. 2012. Assessing single and joint effects of chemicals on the survival and reproduction of Folsomia candida (Collembola) in soil. Environmental Pollution 160: 145-152.

BELDEN JB et al. 2005. Toxicity of pendimethalin to nontarget soil organisms. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 74: 769-776.

BUCH AC et al. 2013. Toxicity of three pesticides commonly used in Brazil to Pontoscolex corethrurus (Müller, 1857) and Eisenia andrei (Bouché 1972). Applied Soil Ecology 69: 32-38.

CAVALIERI SD et al. 2008. Tolerance of corn hybrids to nicosulfuron. Planta Daninha 26: 203-214.

CHELINHO S et al. 2010. Cleanup of atrazine-contaminated soils: ecotoxicological study on the efficacy of a bioremediation tool with Pseudomonas sp. ADP. Journal of Soils and Sediments 10: 568-578.

COX C & SURGAN M. 2006. Unidentified inert ingredients in pesticides: implications for human and environmental health. Environmental Health Perspectives 114: 1803-1806.

DOMENE X et al. 2010. Role of soil properties in sewage sludge toxicity to soil collembolans. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 42: 1982-1990.

EC. 2003. European Commission. Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment Part II. Ispra: Joint research Centre. 337p.

EFSA. 2016. European Food Safety Authority. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance isoxaflutole. EFSA Journal 14: 4416.

EPPO. 2003. European Plant Protection Organization. Environmental Risk Assessment scheme for plant protection products. EPPO Bulletin 33: 151-162.

GARCÍA MVB. 2004. Effects of pesticides on soil fauna: Development of ecotoxicological test methods for tropical regions. Ecology and Development Series 19: 291.

GIESY JP et al. 2000. Ecotoxicological risk assessment for Roundup® herbicide. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 167: 35-120.

HANDY RD et al. 2012. Practical considerations for conducting ecotoxicity test methods with manufactured nanomaterials: what have we learnt so far? Ecotoxicology 21: 933-972.

ISAAA. 2018. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. Available in: http://www.isaaa.org/ Access in: 22 may 2018.

ISO. 2008. International Organization For Standardization. ISO 17512-1. Soil quality – Avoidance test for determinig the quality of soils and effects on behaviour – Part 1: Test with earthworms (Eisenia fetida and Eisenia andrei). Genebra: ISO.

ISO. 2011a. International Organization For Standardization. ISO 11267. Soil quality – Inhibition of reproduction of Collembola (Folsomia candida) by soil pollutants. Genebra: ISO.

ISO 17512-2. 2011b. International Organization For Standardization. Soil quality – Avoidance test for determining the qualite of soils and effects of chemicals on behavior - Part 2: Test with collembolans (Folsomia candida). Genebra: ISO.

ISO 11268-1. 2012a. International Organization For Standardization. Effects of pollutants on earthworms - Part 1: Determination of acute toxicity to Eisenia fetida/Eisenia andrei. Genebra: ISO.

ISO 11268-2. 2012b. International Organization For Standardization. Soil quality - Effects of pollutants on earthworms -Part 2: Determination of effects on reproduction of Eisenia fetida/Eisenia andrei. Genebra: ISO.

JANSCH S et al. 2006. Effects of pesticides on soil invertebrates in model ecosystem and field studies: a review and comparison with laboratory toxicity data. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 25: 2490-2501.

KORBOULEWSKY N et al. 2016. How tree diversity affects soil fauna diversity: a review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 94: 94-106.

LAVELLE P. 2011. Earthworms as Ecosystem Engineers. In: GLIŃSKI J et al. (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Agrophysics. New York: Springer. p. 233-235.

LINS VS et al. 2007. The effect of the glyphosate, 2,4-D, atrazine e nicosulfuron herbicides upon the Edaphic collembola (Arthropoda: Ellipura) in a no tillage system. Neotropical Entomology 36: 261-267.

MARQUES CR et al. 2009. Using earthworm avoidance behaviour to assess the toxicity of formulated herbicides and their active ingredients on natural soils. Journal of Soils Sediments 9: 137-147.

NATAL-DA-LUZ T et al. 2004. Avoidance tests with collembola and earthworms as early screening tools for site-specific assessment of polluted soils. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 23: 2188-2193.

NELSON EA & PENNER D. 2005. Sensitivity of selected crops to isoxaflutole in soil and irrigation water. Weed Technology 19: 659-663.

OECD. 2016. The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Test No. 226: Predatory mite (Hypoaspis (Geolaelaps) aculeifer) reproduction test in soil. Paris: OECD.

PALLETT KE et al. 2001. Isoxaflutole: the background to its discovery and the basis of its herbicidal properties. Pest Management Science 57: 133-142.

RICE PJ et al. 2004. Effect of soil properties on the degradation of isoxaflutole and the sorption-desorption of isoxaflutole and its diketonitrile degradate. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 52: 7621-7627.

SALVIO C et al. 2016. Survival, Reproduction, Avoidance Behavior and Oxidative Stress Biomarkers in the Earthworm Octolasion cyaneum Exposed to Glyphosate. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 96: 314-319.

SCHNEIDER CA et al. 2012. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nature Medicine 9: 671-675.

TOMINACK RL. 2000. Herbicide formulations. Journal of Toxicology 38: 129-135.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5965/223811711922020217

Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Revista de Ciências Agroveterinárias (Rev. Ciênc. Agrovet.), Lages, SC, Brasil        ISSN 2238-1171