Evaluating neonicotinoid insecticide uptake by plants used as buffers and cover crops
Runoff and drainage from fields planted with neonicotinoid-coated seeds often contain insecticides that adversely affect aquatic life and other non-target organisms. Management practices such as in-field cover cropping and edge-of-field buffer strips may reduce insecticide mobility, making it import...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Chemosphere (Oxford) 2023-05, Vol.322, p.138154-138154, Article 138154 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 138154 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 138154 |
| container_title | Chemosphere (Oxford) |
| container_volume | 322 |
| creator | Morrison, Benjamin A. Xia, Kang Stewart, Ryan D. |
| description | Runoff and drainage from fields planted with neonicotinoid-coated seeds often contain insecticides that adversely affect aquatic life and other non-target organisms. Management practices such as in-field cover cropping and edge-of-field buffer strips may reduce insecticide mobility, making it important to understand the ability of different plants used in these interventions to absorb neonicotinoids. In this greenhouse study we evaluated uptake of thiamethoxam, a commonly used neonicotinoid, in six plant species – crimson clover, fescue, oxeye sunflower, Maximillian sunflower, common milkweed, and butterfly milkweed – along with a native forb mixture and a native grass plus native forb mixture. All plants were irrigated with water containing 100 or 500 μg/L of thiamethoxam for 60 days, then plant tissues and soils were analyzed for thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin. Crimson clover accumulated up to 50% of the applied thiamethoxam, which was significantly more than other plants and indicates this species may be a hyper-accumulator that can sequester thiamethoxam. In contrast, milkweed plants had relatively low neonicotinoid uptake ( |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138154 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2780078198</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0045653523004216</els_id><sourcerecordid>3154159742</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-d63b09c2100d6f3aaa8df5cbec2eb6a86fbdb6f711e2aa32d3e53c1d62844f3d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkTlPxDAQhS0EguX4C8h0NFl8xI5TohWXhEQDteXYY_CyGwc7WYl_j9ECooNqpvjeHO8hdEbJnBIqL5Zz-wLrmIcXSDBnhPE55YqKegfNqGrairJW7aIZIbWopODiAB3mvCSkiEW7jw64bFopGJ2hp6uNWU1mDP0z7iH2wcbSx-Bw6DPYMdjgAE_DaF4Bd-94WJl-zHjK4LDJuJu8h5Sx6R22cQMJ2xSHfIz2vFllOPmqR-jp-upxcVvdP9zcLS7vK1tLOlZO8o60llFCnPTcGKOcF7YDy6CTRknfuU76hlJgxnDmOAhuqZNM1bXnjh-h8-3cIcW3CfKo1yFbWJUjIU5Z8-IJFW1Tsz9R1ihCGkVbVdB2i5Zfck7g9ZDC2qR3TYn-DEAv9a8A9GcAehtA0Z5-rZm6Nbgf5bfjBVhsASi-bAIknW2A3oILqfitXQz_WPMBcvqenA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2780078198</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluating neonicotinoid insecticide uptake by plants used as buffers and cover crops</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Morrison, Benjamin A. ; Xia, Kang ; Stewart, Ryan D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Morrison, Benjamin A. ; Xia, Kang ; Stewart, Ryan D.</creatorcontrib><description>Runoff and drainage from fields planted with neonicotinoid-coated seeds often contain insecticides that adversely affect aquatic life and other non-target organisms. Management practices such as in-field cover cropping and edge-of-field buffer strips may reduce insecticide mobility, making it important to understand the ability of different plants used in these interventions to absorb neonicotinoids. In this greenhouse study we evaluated uptake of thiamethoxam, a commonly used neonicotinoid, in six plant species – crimson clover, fescue, oxeye sunflower, Maximillian sunflower, common milkweed, and butterfly milkweed – along with a native forb mixture and a native grass plus native forb mixture. All plants were irrigated with water containing 100 or 500 μg/L of thiamethoxam for 60 days, then plant tissues and soils were analyzed for thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin. Crimson clover accumulated up to 50% of the applied thiamethoxam, which was significantly more than other plants and indicates this species may be a hyper-accumulator that can sequester thiamethoxam. In contrast, milkweed plants had relatively low neonicotinoid uptake (<0.5%), meaning that those species may not pose excessive risk to beneficial insects that feed on them. In all plants, accumulated masses of thiamethoxam and clothianidin were greater in above-ground tissues (leaves and stems) than in below-ground roots, with more accrual in leaves than stems. Plants treated with the higher thiamethoxam concentration retained proportionally more of the insecticides. Because thiamethoxam primarily accumulates in above-ground tissues, management strategies that include biomass removal may reduce the input of such insecticides into the environment.
[Display omitted]
•Plant uptake of thiamethoxam and clothianidin was analyzed for 6 species and 2 mixtures.•Crimson clover accumulated significantly more thiamethoxam than other plants.•Most of the adsorbed insecticides were stored in plant leaves.•Milkweed plants had low uptake and are likely safe for pollinators.•Findings can be used to design best management practices for insecticide sequestration.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0045-6535</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1298</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138154</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36796521</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>aquatic organisms ; Asclepias syriaca ; biomass ; butterflies ; Clothianidin ; Crimson clover ; Crops, Agricultural - metabolism ; drainage ; Edge-of-field buffer ; Festuca ; forbs ; greenhouse experimentation ; Guanidines - metabolism ; Helianthus annuus ; indigenous species ; Insecticides - analysis ; Leaching ; metabolites ; Neonicotinoids ; Nitro Compounds ; Prairie strips ; risk ; Runoff ; species ; Thiamethoxam ; Trifolium incarnatum ; Wildflowers</subject><ispartof>Chemosphere (Oxford), 2023-05, Vol.322, p.138154-138154, Article 138154</ispartof><rights>2023 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-d63b09c2100d6f3aaa8df5cbec2eb6a86fbdb6f711e2aa32d3e53c1d62844f3d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-d63b09c2100d6f3aaa8df5cbec2eb6a86fbdb6f711e2aa32d3e53c1d62844f3d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9700-0351 ; 0000-0002-8445-045X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653523004216$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36796521$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Morrison, Benjamin A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xia, Kang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Ryan D.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluating neonicotinoid insecticide uptake by plants used as buffers and cover crops</title><title>Chemosphere (Oxford)</title><addtitle>Chemosphere</addtitle><description>Runoff and drainage from fields planted with neonicotinoid-coated seeds often contain insecticides that adversely affect aquatic life and other non-target organisms. Management practices such as in-field cover cropping and edge-of-field buffer strips may reduce insecticide mobility, making it important to understand the ability of different plants used in these interventions to absorb neonicotinoids. In this greenhouse study we evaluated uptake of thiamethoxam, a commonly used neonicotinoid, in six plant species – crimson clover, fescue, oxeye sunflower, Maximillian sunflower, common milkweed, and butterfly milkweed – along with a native forb mixture and a native grass plus native forb mixture. All plants were irrigated with water containing 100 or 500 μg/L of thiamethoxam for 60 days, then plant tissues and soils were analyzed for thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin. Crimson clover accumulated up to 50% of the applied thiamethoxam, which was significantly more than other plants and indicates this species may be a hyper-accumulator that can sequester thiamethoxam. In contrast, milkweed plants had relatively low neonicotinoid uptake (<0.5%), meaning that those species may not pose excessive risk to beneficial insects that feed on them. In all plants, accumulated masses of thiamethoxam and clothianidin were greater in above-ground tissues (leaves and stems) than in below-ground roots, with more accrual in leaves than stems. Plants treated with the higher thiamethoxam concentration retained proportionally more of the insecticides. Because thiamethoxam primarily accumulates in above-ground tissues, management strategies that include biomass removal may reduce the input of such insecticides into the environment.
[Display omitted]
•Plant uptake of thiamethoxam and clothianidin was analyzed for 6 species and 2 mixtures.•Crimson clover accumulated significantly more thiamethoxam than other plants.•Most of the adsorbed insecticides were stored in plant leaves.•Milkweed plants had low uptake and are likely safe for pollinators.•Findings can be used to design best management practices for insecticide sequestration.</description><subject>aquatic organisms</subject><subject>Asclepias syriaca</subject><subject>biomass</subject><subject>butterflies</subject><subject>Clothianidin</subject><subject>Crimson clover</subject><subject>Crops, Agricultural - metabolism</subject><subject>drainage</subject><subject>Edge-of-field buffer</subject><subject>Festuca</subject><subject>forbs</subject><subject>greenhouse experimentation</subject><subject>Guanidines - metabolism</subject><subject>Helianthus annuus</subject><subject>indigenous species</subject><subject>Insecticides - analysis</subject><subject>Leaching</subject><subject>metabolites</subject><subject>Neonicotinoids</subject><subject>Nitro Compounds</subject><subject>Prairie strips</subject><subject>risk</subject><subject>Runoff</subject><subject>species</subject><subject>Thiamethoxam</subject><subject>Trifolium incarnatum</subject><subject>Wildflowers</subject><issn>0045-6535</issn><issn>1879-1298</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkTlPxDAQhS0EguX4C8h0NFl8xI5TohWXhEQDteXYY_CyGwc7WYl_j9ECooNqpvjeHO8hdEbJnBIqL5Zz-wLrmIcXSDBnhPE55YqKegfNqGrairJW7aIZIbWopODiAB3mvCSkiEW7jw64bFopGJ2hp6uNWU1mDP0z7iH2wcbSx-Bw6DPYMdjgAE_DaF4Bd-94WJl-zHjK4LDJuJu8h5Sx6R22cQMJ2xSHfIz2vFllOPmqR-jp-upxcVvdP9zcLS7vK1tLOlZO8o60llFCnPTcGKOcF7YDy6CTRknfuU76hlJgxnDmOAhuqZNM1bXnjh-h8-3cIcW3CfKo1yFbWJUjIU5Z8-IJFW1Tsz9R1ihCGkVbVdB2i5Zfck7g9ZDC2qR3TYn-DEAv9a8A9GcAehtA0Z5-rZm6Nbgf5bfjBVhsASi-bAIknW2A3oILqfitXQz_WPMBcvqenA</recordid><startdate>202305</startdate><enddate>202305</enddate><creator>Morrison, Benjamin A.</creator><creator>Xia, Kang</creator><creator>Stewart, Ryan D.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9700-0351</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8445-045X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202305</creationdate><title>Evaluating neonicotinoid insecticide uptake by plants used as buffers and cover crops</title><author>Morrison, Benjamin A. ; Xia, Kang ; Stewart, Ryan D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-d63b09c2100d6f3aaa8df5cbec2eb6a86fbdb6f711e2aa32d3e53c1d62844f3d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>aquatic organisms</topic><topic>Asclepias syriaca</topic><topic>biomass</topic><topic>butterflies</topic><topic>Clothianidin</topic><topic>Crimson clover</topic><topic>Crops, Agricultural - metabolism</topic><topic>drainage</topic><topic>Edge-of-field buffer</topic><topic>Festuca</topic><topic>forbs</topic><topic>greenhouse experimentation</topic><topic>Guanidines - metabolism</topic><topic>Helianthus annuus</topic><topic>indigenous species</topic><topic>Insecticides - analysis</topic><topic>Leaching</topic><topic>metabolites</topic><topic>Neonicotinoids</topic><topic>Nitro Compounds</topic><topic>Prairie strips</topic><topic>risk</topic><topic>Runoff</topic><topic>species</topic><topic>Thiamethoxam</topic><topic>Trifolium incarnatum</topic><topic>Wildflowers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Morrison, Benjamin A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xia, Kang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Ryan D.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><jtitle>Chemosphere (Oxford)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Morrison, Benjamin A.</au><au>Xia, Kang</au><au>Stewart, Ryan D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluating neonicotinoid insecticide uptake by plants used as buffers and cover crops</atitle><jtitle>Chemosphere (Oxford)</jtitle><addtitle>Chemosphere</addtitle><date>2023-05</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>322</volume><spage>138154</spage><epage>138154</epage><pages>138154-138154</pages><artnum>138154</artnum><issn>0045-6535</issn><eissn>1879-1298</eissn><abstract>Runoff and drainage from fields planted with neonicotinoid-coated seeds often contain insecticides that adversely affect aquatic life and other non-target organisms. Management practices such as in-field cover cropping and edge-of-field buffer strips may reduce insecticide mobility, making it important to understand the ability of different plants used in these interventions to absorb neonicotinoids. In this greenhouse study we evaluated uptake of thiamethoxam, a commonly used neonicotinoid, in six plant species – crimson clover, fescue, oxeye sunflower, Maximillian sunflower, common milkweed, and butterfly milkweed – along with a native forb mixture and a native grass plus native forb mixture. All plants were irrigated with water containing 100 or 500 μg/L of thiamethoxam for 60 days, then plant tissues and soils were analyzed for thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin. Crimson clover accumulated up to 50% of the applied thiamethoxam, which was significantly more than other plants and indicates this species may be a hyper-accumulator that can sequester thiamethoxam. In contrast, milkweed plants had relatively low neonicotinoid uptake (<0.5%), meaning that those species may not pose excessive risk to beneficial insects that feed on them. In all plants, accumulated masses of thiamethoxam and clothianidin were greater in above-ground tissues (leaves and stems) than in below-ground roots, with more accrual in leaves than stems. Plants treated with the higher thiamethoxam concentration retained proportionally more of the insecticides. Because thiamethoxam primarily accumulates in above-ground tissues, management strategies that include biomass removal may reduce the input of such insecticides into the environment.
[Display omitted]
•Plant uptake of thiamethoxam and clothianidin was analyzed for 6 species and 2 mixtures.•Crimson clover accumulated significantly more thiamethoxam than other plants.•Most of the adsorbed insecticides were stored in plant leaves.•Milkweed plants had low uptake and are likely safe for pollinators.•Findings can be used to design best management practices for insecticide sequestration.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>36796521</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138154</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9700-0351</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8445-045X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0045-6535 |
| ispartof | Chemosphere (Oxford), 2023-05, Vol.322, p.138154-138154, Article 138154 |
| issn | 0045-6535 1879-1298 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2780078198 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | aquatic organisms Asclepias syriaca biomass butterflies Clothianidin Crimson clover Crops, Agricultural - metabolism drainage Edge-of-field buffer Festuca forbs greenhouse experimentation Guanidines - metabolism Helianthus annuus indigenous species Insecticides - analysis Leaching metabolites Neonicotinoids Nitro Compounds Prairie strips risk Runoff species Thiamethoxam Trifolium incarnatum Wildflowers |
| title | Evaluating neonicotinoid insecticide uptake by plants used as buffers and cover crops |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T16%3A29%3A14IST&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=Evaluating%20neonicotinoid%20insecticide%20uptake%20by%20plants%20used%20as%20buffers%20and%20cover%20crops&rft.jtitle=Chemosphere%20(Oxford)&rft.au=Morrison,%20Benjamin%20A.&rft.date=2023-05&rft.volume=322&rft.spage=138154&rft.epage=138154&rft.pages=138154-138154&rft.artnum=138154&rft.issn=0045-6535&rft.eissn=1879-1298&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138154&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3154159742%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=2780078198&rft_id=info:pmid/36796521&rft_els_id=S0045653523004216&rfr_iscdi=true |