Effects of azinphos-methyl on northern bobwhite: a comparison of laboratory and field results
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) ecological risk assessment process uses laboratory toxicity data in quotient indices to characterize risks to wildlife, but with poor understanding of the relationship between these data and actual field effects. To explore this relat...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Environmental toxicology and chemistry 1998-07, Vol.17 (7), p.1364-1370 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1370 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 1364 |
| container_title | Environmental toxicology and chemistry |
| container_volume | 17 |
| creator | Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.) Bennett, R.S Landis, W.G |
| description | The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) ecological risk assessment process uses laboratory toxicity data in quotient indices to characterize risks to wildlife, but with poor understanding of the relationship between these data and actual field effects. To explore this relationship, we compared toxicity results from a controlled field study to those from a dietary toxicity (median lethal concentration) laboratory test. In the field test, northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) chicks were cross-fostered to bantam chicken (Gallus domesticus) hens. Then, 12-d-old broods in enclosed alfalfa fields were exposed to sprayed azinphos-methyl (Guthion 2S) at three application rates (0[control], 0.77, and 3.11 kg active ingredient/ha). Chick survival was significantly lower at 3.11 kg/ha 0 to 5 d postspray and at both application rates 6 to 10 d postspray compared to control (p 0.05). Chick brain acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity, growth, and weight of crop contents were significantly reduced in treatments compared to control (p 0.05). In the laboratory test, 12-d-old bobwhite were exposed to dietary concentrations of 0 (control), 150, 240, 380, and 600 ppm azinphos-methyl for 5 d. Survival was significantly lower at 600 ppm compared to control, and brain AChE activity and growth rates were significantly reduced from control for all concentrations (p 0.05). Chick survival, brain AChE activity, and growth in the field were significantly different from equivalent exposures in the laboratory (p 0.05), with equivalency determined by U.S. EPA's vegetation residue estimates, and temporal patterns of effects differed between field and laboratory. We conclude that the effects observed in the field differed from that predicted by risk quotients because the quotient method does not consider alternate routes of exposure, behavioral responses, influence of spatial and temporal environmental variability, or indirect effects |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/etc.5620170721 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16560205</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>16560205</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3701-716941b57c06190d9cf9cb104f2238797e64e5ad1ba4b938a5467dac0c4414e53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkb1vFDEQxS0EEkegpUNygej24q-113QoCgEpCkgQqJA167U5g299sX0Kx1-Po40SUUE1xfzem9F7CD2nZE0JYceu2nUvGaGKKEYfoBXte9YNkg4P0YooTjrF5PAYPSnlByFUaq1X6Nup987WgpPH8DvMu00q3dbVzSHiNOM55bpxecZjGq83obrXGLBN2x3kUNq-qSKMKUNN-YBhnrAPLk44u7KPtTxFjzzE4p7dziN0-fb088m77vzD2fuTN-ed5YrQTrVnBB17ZYmkmkzaem1HSoRnjA9KKyeF62GiI4hR8wF6IdUEllghaNvwI_Rq8d3ldLV3pZptKNbFCLNL-2Ko7CVh5D9AIYZBc93A9QLanErJzptdDlvIB0OJuYnbtLjNfdxN8PLWGYqF6DPMNpQ7FeOcS3WD6QW7DtEd_mFqGvnXiW7RhlLdrzst5J9GKq568_XizCjJ-gv58YuRjX-x8B6Sge-tMXP5ibbaW_ui_fMHBmun4w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>14488939</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effects of azinphos-methyl on northern bobwhite: a comparison of laboratory and field results</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.) ; Bennett, R.S ; Landis, W.G</creator><creatorcontrib>Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.) ; Bennett, R.S ; Landis, W.G</creatorcontrib><description>The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) ecological risk assessment process uses laboratory toxicity data in quotient indices to characterize risks to wildlife, but with poor understanding of the relationship between these data and actual field effects. To explore this relationship, we compared toxicity results from a controlled field study to those from a dietary toxicity (median lethal concentration) laboratory test. In the field test, northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) chicks were cross-fostered to bantam chicken (Gallus domesticus) hens. Then, 12-d-old broods in enclosed alfalfa fields were exposed to sprayed azinphos-methyl (Guthion 2S) at three application rates (0[control], 0.77, and 3.11 kg active ingredient/ha). Chick survival was significantly lower at 3.11 kg/ha 0 to 5 d postspray and at both application rates 6 to 10 d postspray compared to control (p 0.05). Chick brain acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity, growth, and weight of crop contents were significantly reduced in treatments compared to control (p 0.05). In the laboratory test, 12-d-old bobwhite were exposed to dietary concentrations of 0 (control), 150, 240, 380, and 600 ppm azinphos-methyl for 5 d. Survival was significantly lower at 600 ppm compared to control, and brain AChE activity and growth rates were significantly reduced from control for all concentrations (p 0.05). Chick survival, brain AChE activity, and growth in the field were significantly different from equivalent exposures in the laboratory (p 0.05), with equivalency determined by U.S. EPA's vegetation residue estimates, and temporal patterns of effects differed between field and laboratory. We conclude that the effects observed in the field differed from that predicted by risk quotients because the quotient method does not consider alternate routes of exposure, behavioral responses, influence of spatial and temporal environmental variability, or indirect effects</description><identifier>ISSN: 0730-7268</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-8618</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/etc.5620170721</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ETOCDK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Periodicals, Inc</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Aves ; AZINFOS-METIL ; AZINPHOS-METHYL ; Biological and medical sciences ; CAILLE ; CODORNIZ ; COLINUS VIRGINIANUS ; ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ; Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution ; EFECTOS SECUNDARIOS ; Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on vertebrates ; EFFET SECONDAIRE ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Gallus domesticus ; NONTARGET EFFECTS ; NONTARGET ORGANISMS ; Organophosphate ; QUAILS ; Quotient method ; RIESGO ; RISK ; RISK ASSESSMENT ; RISQUE ; SIDE EFFECTS ; SUPERVIVENCIA ; SURVIE ; SURVIVAL ; TOXICIDAD ; TOXICITE ; TOXICITY</subject><ispartof>Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 1998-07, Vol.17 (7), p.1364-1370</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 1998 SETAC</rights><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3701-716941b57c06190d9cf9cb104f2238797e64e5ad1ba4b938a5467dac0c4414e53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3701-716941b57c06190d9cf9cb104f2238797e64e5ad1ba4b938a5467dac0c4414e53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fetc.5620170721$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fetc.5620170721$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2333671$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bennett, R.S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Landis, W.G</creatorcontrib><title>Effects of azinphos-methyl on northern bobwhite: a comparison of laboratory and field results</title><title>Environmental toxicology and chemistry</title><addtitle>Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry</addtitle><description>The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) ecological risk assessment process uses laboratory toxicity data in quotient indices to characterize risks to wildlife, but with poor understanding of the relationship between these data and actual field effects. To explore this relationship, we compared toxicity results from a controlled field study to those from a dietary toxicity (median lethal concentration) laboratory test. In the field test, northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) chicks were cross-fostered to bantam chicken (Gallus domesticus) hens. Then, 12-d-old broods in enclosed alfalfa fields were exposed to sprayed azinphos-methyl (Guthion 2S) at three application rates (0[control], 0.77, and 3.11 kg active ingredient/ha). Chick survival was significantly lower at 3.11 kg/ha 0 to 5 d postspray and at both application rates 6 to 10 d postspray compared to control (p 0.05). Chick brain acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity, growth, and weight of crop contents were significantly reduced in treatments compared to control (p 0.05). In the laboratory test, 12-d-old bobwhite were exposed to dietary concentrations of 0 (control), 150, 240, 380, and 600 ppm azinphos-methyl for 5 d. Survival was significantly lower at 600 ppm compared to control, and brain AChE activity and growth rates were significantly reduced from control for all concentrations (p 0.05). Chick survival, brain AChE activity, and growth in the field were significantly different from equivalent exposures in the laboratory (p 0.05), with equivalency determined by U.S. EPA's vegetation residue estimates, and temporal patterns of effects differed between field and laboratory. We conclude that the effects observed in the field differed from that predicted by risk quotients because the quotient method does not consider alternate routes of exposure, behavioral responses, influence of spatial and temporal environmental variability, or indirect effects</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Aves</subject><subject>AZINFOS-METIL</subject><subject>AZINPHOS-METHYL</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>CAILLE</subject><subject>CODORNIZ</subject><subject>COLINUS VIRGINIANUS</subject><subject>ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT</subject><subject>Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution</subject><subject>EFECTOS SECUNDARIOS</subject><subject>Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on vertebrates</subject><subject>EFFET SECONDAIRE</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Gallus domesticus</subject><subject>NONTARGET EFFECTS</subject><subject>NONTARGET ORGANISMS</subject><subject>Organophosphate</subject><subject>QUAILS</subject><subject>Quotient method</subject><subject>RIESGO</subject><subject>RISK</subject><subject>RISK ASSESSMENT</subject><subject>RISQUE</subject><subject>SIDE EFFECTS</subject><subject>SUPERVIVENCIA</subject><subject>SURVIE</subject><subject>SURVIVAL</subject><subject>TOXICIDAD</subject><subject>TOXICITE</subject><subject>TOXICITY</subject><issn>0730-7268</issn><issn>1552-8618</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkb1vFDEQxS0EEkegpUNygej24q-113QoCgEpCkgQqJA167U5g299sX0Kx1-Po40SUUE1xfzem9F7CD2nZE0JYceu2nUvGaGKKEYfoBXte9YNkg4P0YooTjrF5PAYPSnlByFUaq1X6Nup987WgpPH8DvMu00q3dbVzSHiNOM55bpxecZjGq83obrXGLBN2x3kUNq-qSKMKUNN-YBhnrAPLk44u7KPtTxFjzzE4p7dziN0-fb088m77vzD2fuTN-ed5YrQTrVnBB17ZYmkmkzaem1HSoRnjA9KKyeF62GiI4hR8wF6IdUEllghaNvwI_Rq8d3ldLV3pZptKNbFCLNL-2Ko7CVh5D9AIYZBc93A9QLanErJzptdDlvIB0OJuYnbtLjNfdxN8PLWGYqF6DPMNpQ7FeOcS3WD6QW7DtEd_mFqGvnXiW7RhlLdrzst5J9GKq568_XizCjJ-gv58YuRjX-x8B6Sge-tMXP5ibbaW_ui_fMHBmun4w</recordid><startdate>199807</startdate><enddate>199807</enddate><creator>Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.)</creator><creator>Bennett, R.S</creator><creator>Landis, W.G</creator><general>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</general><general>SETAC</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199807</creationdate><title>Effects of azinphos-methyl on northern bobwhite: a comparison of laboratory and field results</title><author>Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.) ; Bennett, R.S ; Landis, W.G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3701-716941b57c06190d9cf9cb104f2238797e64e5ad1ba4b938a5467dac0c4414e53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Aves</topic><topic>AZINFOS-METIL</topic><topic>AZINPHOS-METHYL</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>CAILLE</topic><topic>CODORNIZ</topic><topic>COLINUS VIRGINIANUS</topic><topic>ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT</topic><topic>Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution</topic><topic>EFECTOS SECUNDARIOS</topic><topic>Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on vertebrates</topic><topic>EFFET SECONDAIRE</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Gallus domesticus</topic><topic>NONTARGET EFFECTS</topic><topic>NONTARGET ORGANISMS</topic><topic>Organophosphate</topic><topic>QUAILS</topic><topic>Quotient method</topic><topic>RIESGO</topic><topic>RISK</topic><topic>RISK ASSESSMENT</topic><topic>RISQUE</topic><topic>SIDE EFFECTS</topic><topic>SUPERVIVENCIA</topic><topic>SURVIE</topic><topic>SURVIVAL</topic><topic>TOXICIDAD</topic><topic>TOXICITE</topic><topic>TOXICITY</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bennett, R.S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Landis, W.G</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Environmental toxicology and chemistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Matz, A.C. (Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.)</au><au>Bennett, R.S</au><au>Landis, W.G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effects of azinphos-methyl on northern bobwhite: a comparison of laboratory and field results</atitle><jtitle>Environmental toxicology and chemistry</jtitle><addtitle>Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry</addtitle><date>1998-07</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1364</spage><epage>1370</epage><pages>1364-1370</pages><issn>0730-7268</issn><eissn>1552-8618</eissn><coden>ETOCDK</coden><abstract>The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) ecological risk assessment process uses laboratory toxicity data in quotient indices to characterize risks to wildlife, but with poor understanding of the relationship between these data and actual field effects. To explore this relationship, we compared toxicity results from a controlled field study to those from a dietary toxicity (median lethal concentration) laboratory test. In the field test, northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) chicks were cross-fostered to bantam chicken (Gallus domesticus) hens. Then, 12-d-old broods in enclosed alfalfa fields were exposed to sprayed azinphos-methyl (Guthion 2S) at three application rates (0[control], 0.77, and 3.11 kg active ingredient/ha). Chick survival was significantly lower at 3.11 kg/ha 0 to 5 d postspray and at both application rates 6 to 10 d postspray compared to control (p 0.05). Chick brain acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity, growth, and weight of crop contents were significantly reduced in treatments compared to control (p 0.05). In the laboratory test, 12-d-old bobwhite were exposed to dietary concentrations of 0 (control), 150, 240, 380, and 600 ppm azinphos-methyl for 5 d. Survival was significantly lower at 600 ppm compared to control, and brain AChE activity and growth rates were significantly reduced from control for all concentrations (p 0.05). Chick survival, brain AChE activity, and growth in the field were significantly different from equivalent exposures in the laboratory (p 0.05), with equivalency determined by U.S. EPA's vegetation residue estimates, and temporal patterns of effects differed between field and laboratory. We conclude that the effects observed in the field differed from that predicted by risk quotients because the quotient method does not consider alternate routes of exposure, behavioral responses, influence of spatial and temporal environmental variability, or indirect effects</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/etc.5620170721</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0730-7268 |
| ispartof | Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 1998-07, Vol.17 (7), p.1364-1370 |
| issn | 0730-7268 1552-8618 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16560205 |
| source | Wiley Journals |
| subjects | Animal, plant and microbial ecology Applied ecology Aves AZINFOS-METIL AZINPHOS-METHYL Biological and medical sciences CAILLE CODORNIZ COLINUS VIRGINIANUS ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution EFECTOS SECUNDARIOS Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on vertebrates EFFET SECONDAIRE Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Gallus domesticus NONTARGET EFFECTS NONTARGET ORGANISMS Organophosphate QUAILS Quotient method RIESGO RISK RISK ASSESSMENT RISQUE SIDE EFFECTS SUPERVIVENCIA SURVIE SURVIVAL TOXICIDAD TOXICITE TOXICITY |
| title | Effects of azinphos-methyl on northern bobwhite: a comparison of laboratory and field results |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T19%3A40%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effects%20of%20azinphos-methyl%20on%20northern%20bobwhite:%20a%20comparison%20of%20laboratory%20and%20field%20results&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20toxicology%20and%20chemistry&rft.au=Matz,%20A.C.%20(Western%20Washington%20University,%20Bellingham,%20WA.)&rft.date=1998-07&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1364&rft.epage=1370&rft.pages=1364-1370&rft.issn=0730-7268&rft.eissn=1552-8618&rft.coden=ETOCDK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/etc.5620170721&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E16560205%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=14488939&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |