从经食、饮水和吸入途径评估8种经济林常用农药对鸟类的暴露风险

采用《农药登记 环境风险评估指南 第3部分:鸟类》中的暴露分析模型及美国环保署的SIP模型和STIR模型,分别从经食、饮水和吸入3种途径对残杀威、虫螨腈、敌敌畏、敌百虫、马拉硫磷、杀螟硫磷、茚虫威和甲氨基阿维菌素苯甲酸盐8种农药对鸟类的暴露风险进行了评估。农药的登记作物信息及其用药数据来源于 “中国农药信息网”,鸟类的毒理学数据源于美国环保署、欧洲食品安全局、有机小分子生物活性数据库以及农药特性数据库。评估结果表明:经食途径暴露后,残杀威对鸟类的初级急性风险为不可接受,对鸟类的初级长期风险为可接受,敌敌畏、虫螨腈、敌百虫和杀螟硫磷对鸟类的初级急性、短期和长期风险均不可接受,马拉硫磷对鸟类的初级短期和长期风险均不可接受,茚虫威和甲氨基阿维菌素苯甲酸盐对鸟类的初级急性、短期和长期风险均可接受;通过饮水途径暴露后,虫螨腈和茚虫威对鸟类的急性和慢性风险无需关注,其余6种农药对鸟类的急性和慢性风险需引起关注;通过吸入途径暴露后,只有敌敌畏的挥发吸入风险需引起关注,其余7种农药对鸟类的雾滴吸入和挥发吸入风险均无需关注。综上所述,8种林业常用农药中,仅茚虫威通过经食、饮水和吸入3种途径暴露后对鸟类的风险可接受或无需关注,因此,除茚虫威外,其余7种农药在林业上使用时对鸟类的风险均需加以关注。评估结果可为今后这8种农药在经济林中安全施用提供参考,同时也对我国鸟类风险评估方法的完善提出了建议。但本研究开展的仅为初级风险评估,评估结果较为保守,后续还可通过开展相关调查及毒理学研究,进一步优化评估参数,获得更为精确的评估结果。     

农业部农药检定所文件农药检(生测)函[2009]50号关于印发《杀菌、杀虫剂对作物安全性室内试验准则(试行)》的通知

各有关单位: 为加强农药使用对作物安全性风险评估管理、二○○七年十二月八日农业部以第10号令发布的《农药登记资料规定》中明确规定,新农药制剂在申请田间试验时要提交"对当茬试验作物的室内安全性试验报告".针对这一具体要求,为更科学地评价拟申请登记杀菌、杀虫剂对作物的直接药害风险,我所制定了《杀菌、杀虫剂对作物安全性室内试验准则(试行)》(见附件),现下发给你们,请参照执行.     

欧洲食品安全局确认氟虫腈对蜜蜂有风险

欧洲食品安全局(EFSA)的一项评估表明,杀虫剂氟虫腈处理玉米种子对蜜蜂产生很高的急性风险,主要原因为粉尘。报告指出,由于缺乏资料,还没有完成杀虫剂通过其他作物和暴露途径对蜜蜂影响的评估,但认为该药在蔬菜上使用对蜜蜂低风险。巴斯夫(BASF)回应称,该评估并没有确认氟虫腈登记使用有任何新的风险,并指出除杀虫剂之外,还应考虑其他复杂因素对蜜蜂健康的影响。关于此事的最新进展是欧盟委员会针对三种新烟碱类杀虫剂     

农业部农药检定所文件——关于印发《杀菌、杀虫剂对作物安全性室内试验准则（试行）》的通知

各有关单位： 为加强农药使用对作物安全性风险评估管理,二oo七年十二月八日农业部以第10号令发布的《农药登记资料规定》中明确规定,新农药制剂在申请田间试验时要提交“对当茬试验作物的室内安全性试验报告”。针对这一具体要求,为更科学地评价拟申请登记杀菌、杀虫剂对作物的直接药害风险,我所制定了《杀菌、杀虫剂对作物安全性室内试验准则（试行）》（见附件）,现下发给你们,请参照执行。     

机械施药危害性的风险评估方法研究

基于专家调查数据,使用层次分析法,对机械施药危害性进行事前的风险评估,建立了相应的风险评估指标体系,并计算出了可接受的权重值,填补了我国机械施药危害性风险评估的空白。研究表明,农药和施药废弃物是机械施药产生危害的主要危险源,而农户操作的随机性更增加了危害发生的复杂性。     

中国水稻上登记吡虫啉单剂的水生生态风险评估

为评估吡虫啉药剂对水生生态系统的风险,对目前中国水稻上登记使用的吡虫啉单剂品种进行了梳理,基于风险评估保守性的原则,归纳出不同剂型产品所适用的施用量,采用Top-Rice模型和风险商值 (RQ)法,对现有吡虫啉单剂产品进行了水生生态风险评估。结果显示:截至2020年6月,近3年中国水稻上登记的有效吡虫啉单剂产品共375种,其中可湿性粉剂(WP)占比最大,为56.53%;其次为可溶液剂(SL),占11.47%;乳油(EC)、悬浮剂(SC)、水分散粒剂(WG)、微乳剂(ME)、悬浮种衣剂(FS)、泡腾片剂(EB)、片剂(TA)、种子处理可分散粉剂(WS) 分别占9.87%、8.27%、8.00%、3.73%、1.33%、0.27%、0.27%和0.27%。水生生态风险评估结果表明:7种吡虫啉单剂产品在各种场景-时间点施用后,其预测环境浓度(PEC)范围为质量浓度0.19 ~ 51.28 μg/L;在现有登记施用条件下,对鱼类和无脊椎动物的急性暴露风险均可接受;就慢性暴露风险而言,对鱼类和初级生产者的慢性暴露风险均可接受,而对以大型溞和溪流摇蚊为代表的无脊椎生物,仅13.58%的模拟组其 RQ 值小于1,故具有一定的潜在风险。研究结果表明,按照目前登记的施用方法,吡虫啉单剂产品在水稻上使用时对水生生态系统存在一定的风险,但需要说明的是,为综合评价吡虫啉单剂产品对水生生态系统可能产生的风险,本研究中对施用方法的取值分析偏保守,且由于代谢物数据不充分,使得评估结果存在一定的不确定性。     

福建省主产区普通白菜中农药残留水平及膳食暴露风险评估

为评估福建省主产区普通白菜中农药残留水平及对人体的膳食暴露风险,采用现有的标准检测方法,对在福建省主产区采集的88个普通白菜样品中的68种农药残留进行了检测分析,并对检出农药进行了短期和长期膳食暴露风险评估。结果显示：88个普通白菜样品中,共有68个样品检出了农药残留,总检出率为77.27%;共检出27种农药,其中杀虫剂18种,杀菌剂9种;检出2种及2种以上农药残留的样品占检出农药残留样品总量的83.82%,存在农药多残留现象。利用相关农药的毒理学数据——急性参考剂量(ARfD)和每日允许摄入量(ADI)、农药残留数据和普通白菜的膳食消费量数据,评估了所检出农药的短期和长期膳食暴露风险。其中,短期膳食暴露风险值(%ARfD)范围为0～90%,长期膳食暴露风险商贡献率(RQc%)范围为0～46%。研究表明,福建省主产区普通白菜中的农药残留水平较低,通过食用该地区生产的普通白菜对消费者的农药残留膳食暴露风险整体在可接受范围内。     

25种农药鸟类初级环境风险评估

评估了蔬菜常用25种农药鸟类环境风险,结果表明,敌敌畏、虫螨腈、敌百虫、毒死蜱、四聚乙醛和福美双共6种农药按照登记用量和登记方法使用对鸟类的急性风险不可接受;虫螨腈对鸟类的短期饲喂风险不可接受,上述农药在使用时应避开鸟类活动区域。     

双唑草腈对3种水生生物的急性毒性及初级生态风险评估

为研究双唑草腈对水生生物的毒性和水体环境风险,在实验室条件下,以斜生栅藻、大型溞和斑马鱼为研究对象,分别采用OECD推荐的生长抑制法、活动抑制法、静态法和TOP-RICE模型,开展了双唑草腈的急性毒性试验和初级生态风险评估。结果表明:双唑草腈对斜生栅藻细胞增殖的72 h半数抑制效应浓度 (72 h-EC₅₀) 为1.44 × 10?2 mg/L,对大型溞活动的48 h半数抑制效应浓度 (48 h-EC₅₀) 为15.09 mg/L,对斑马鱼的96 h半数致死效应浓度 (96 h-LC₅₀) 为23.05 mg/L,根据我国《化学农药环境安全评价实验准则》中的毒性等级划分标准,相应毒性等级分别为高毒、低毒和低毒;在水生生态系统中,双唑草腈对脊椎动物和无脊椎动物的急性毒性风险商(RQ) 值小于1的分组占所有模拟场景的60%以上,超过60% 的分组对初级生产者的RQ值大于1,说明双唑草腈对大型溞和斑马鱼较为安全,对水生生态系统中脊椎动物和无脊椎动物的风险在可接受范围,但其对斜生栅藻毒性高,且对初级生产者的风险为不可接受。因此,生产中在施用双唑草腈时应避免药剂进入稻田周边水体,可通过减少农药使用量、合理调整施药时期等方法来减少双唑草腈对水生生态环境的风险,建议在早稻分蘖前期和晚稻分蘖后期使用。     

澳大利亚计划更新农药对蜜蜂的风险评估指南

正澳大利亚农药和兽药管理局(APVMA)近期提出了一个用来引导未来化学农药对蜜蜂及其他传粉昆虫风险评估的路径图。2013年召开的管理会认为北美的风险评估方法更适用于澳大利亚,同时APVMA认为欧盟风险评估中的一些元素也可以被吸收进来。该路径图提出分阶段进行风险评估。评估第一阶段是传统的计算风险商值的方法,路线图建议根据已有数据并借鉴欧盟北美的方法对这一阶段的方法进行改进。更高级别的风险评     

Sugar concentration in nectar: a quantitative metric of crop attractiveness for refined pollinator risk assessments

Those involved with pollinator risk assessment know that agricultural crops vary in attractiveness to bees. Intuitively, this means that exposure to agricultural pesticides is likely greatest for attractive plants and lowest for unattractive plants. While crop attractiveness in the risk assessment process has been qualitatively remarked on by some authorities, absent is direction on how to refine the process with quantitative metrics of attractiveness. At a high level, attractiveness of crops to bees appears to depend on several key variables, including but not limited to: floral, olfactory, visual and tactile cues; seasonal availability; physical and behavioral characteristics of the bee; plant and nectar rewards. Notwithstanding the complexities and interactions among these variables, sugar content in nectar stands out as a suitable quantitative metric by which to refine pollinator risk assessments for attractiveness. Provided herein is a proposed way to use sugar nectar concentration to adjust the exposure parameter (with what is called a crop attractiveness factor) in the calculation of risk quotients in order to derive crop‐specific tier I assessments. This Perspective is meant to invite discussion on incorporating such changes in the risk assessment process. © 2016 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.     

Risk assessment for honey bees and pesticides—recent developments and ‘new issues’

In 2008, major areas of discussion at the ICPBR Bee Protection Group meeting were the development of a honey bee risk assessment scheme for systemic pesticides and revision of the test guidelines for semi‐field and field studies. The risk assessment scheme for systemic pesticides is based on analysis of conditions for exposure of bees to residues. These are based on a stepwise approach, starting with simple calculations based on existing data in dossiers and progressing to higher‐tier semi‐field and field studies (the guidelines for these have been modified in line with this). The proposed scheme has been tested with data packages of high‐ and low‐risk PPPs. A future area of interest for the group may be the risks posed by guttation fluid containing systemic pesticides. A recent paper on ‘Translocation of neonicotinoid insecticides from coated seeds to seedling guttation drops: a novel way of intoxication for bees’ has focused significant interest on the possible risks posed by the presence of residues of systemic pesticides in guttation fluid to water‐collecting honey bees. The occurrence of guttation and the presence of pesticide residues in the fluid are discussed, together with remaining questions that will need to be addressed in answering whether such a route of exposure may pose a risk to honey bees. © Crown copyright 2010. Reproduced with permission of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Published by JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Comparing ecological risks of pesticides: the utility of a Risk Quotient ranking approach across refinements of exposure

Environmental risk assessment of pesticides and other chemicals often uses the Risk Quotient (RQ) method to characterize risk quantitatively. An RQ is calculated by dividing an environmental exposure value by a toxicity end-point value. Tier 1 RQs, which are characterized by highly conservative toxicity and exposure assumptions, are used primarily for screening out negligible risks in regulatory decision making. It has been argued that the tier 1 RQ approach is valuable for making direct comparisons of quantitative risk between pesticides. However, an outstanding question is whether relative risks among pesticides would change if refinements of exposure are incorporated into the RQ calculations. This study tested that hypothesis. Aquatic ecological risk assessments were conducted for 12 herbicide and 12 insecticide active ingredients used on agricultural crops in the USA. The pesticides were chosen because surface-water monitoring data for them were available as part of the United States Geological Survey's National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA). Ecological receptors and effects evaluated were aquatic non-vascular plants (acute risk), aquatic vertebrates (acute risk) and aquatic invertebrates (acute risk) for the herbicides and aquatic vertebrates (acute and chronic risk) and aquatic invertebrates (acute and chronic risk) for the insecticides. The data indicate that there were significant statistical correlations between numerical rankings of tier 1 RQs and RQs using refined environmental exposures. The results support the hypothesis that numerical ranking of RQs for the purpose of comparing potential ecological risks is a valid approach because the rankings are significantly correlated regardless of the degree of exposure refinement.     

Risk assessment to honey bees: a scheme developed in France for non-sprayed systemic compounds

BACKGROUND: Directive 91/414/EEC envisages that the systemic properties of active substances, if any, are taken into account in evaluating the risk posed to the environment by plant protection products. Among others, honey bees may be exposed to substances via this route, which may pose problems when substances with high toxicity are ingested through pollen or nectar. The guidance documents in support of the risk assessment to bees within the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC do not provide detailed technical guidance on how to proceed in a risk assessment for substances with systemic properties. RESULTS: A stepwise approach aiming specifically to assess the risk posed by non-sprayed systemic substances to bees is therefore proposed. This approach first identifies substances with systemic properties, which should be quantified in plant material as pollen and nectar. Exposure estimates calculated for different categories of bees (e.g. foraging bees), based on expected concentrations of the product in pollen or nectar, may be compared with several toxicity endpoints for acute or chronic effects on adults and/or larvae with a toxicity/exposure ratio, which is a measurement of potential risks. CONCLUSION: Such a ratio is proposed to be used as a trigger for any further refined assessment that would focus on the measurement of effects at the colony level.     

Is Apis mellifera more sensitive to insecticides than other insects?

BACKGROUND: Honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are among the most important pollinators in natural and agricultural settings. They commonly encounter insecticides, and the effects of insecticides on honey bees have been frequently noted. It has been suggested that honey bees may be (as a species) uniquely sensitive to insecticides, although no comparative toxicology study has been undertaken to examine this claim. An extensive literature review was conducted, using data in which adult insects were topically treated with insecticides. The goal of this review was to summarize insecticide toxicity data between A. mellifera and other insects to determine the relative sensitivity of honey bees to insecticides. RESULTS: It was found that, in general, honey bees were no more sensitive than other insect species across the 62 insecticides examined. In addition, honey bees were not more sensitive to any of the six classes of insecticides (carbamates, nicotinoids, organochlorines, organophosphates, pyrethroids and miscellaneous) examined. CONCLUSIONS: While honey bees can be sensitive to individual insecticides, they are not a highly sensitive species to insecticides overall, or even to specific classes of insecticides. However, all pesticides should be used in a way that minimizes honey bee exposure, so as to minimize possible declines in the number of bees and/or honey contamination. Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry     

建立和完善我国的农药再评价机制

农药作为农业投入品对保障农产品质量安全,保障人类健康和环境安全至关重要。加强对登记后农药的管理是农药风险管理的重要内容,各国政府为长期有效地控制农药风险．保证安全,逐步将登记后农药的再登记和再评价纳入登记管理范畴。本文着重探讨农药再评价的内涵．介绍欧盟和美国的农药登记再评价的基本情况,在分析我国农药登记后管理工作的基础上,提出加强农药登记后管理需要完善法律规定,建立长期的再评价制度和科学评价机制,提高公众参与意识,增强与社会体系的开放性与协作性。     

The relevance of sublethal effects in honey bee testing for pesticide risk assessment

The option of an evaluation and assessment of possible sublethal effects of pesticides on bees has been a subject of discussion by scientists and regulatory authorities. Effects considered included learning behaviour and orientation capacity. This discussion was enhanced by the French bee issue and allegations against systemic insecticides that were linked to the hypothesis that sublethal intoxication might even have led to reported colony losses. This paper considers whether and, if so, how sublethal effects should be incorporated into risk assessment, by addressing a number of questions: What is meant by a sublethal effect? Which sublethal effects should be measured, when and how? How are sublethal effects to be included in risk assessments? The authors conclude that sublethal studies may be helpful as an optional test to address particular, compound‐specific concerns, as a lower‐tier alternative to semi‐field or field testing, if the effects are shown to be ecologically relevant. However, available higher‐tier data (semi‐field, field tests) should make any additional sublethal testing unnecessary, and higher‐tier data should always override data of lower‐tier trials on sublethal effects. © Crown copyright 2007. Reproduced with the permission of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

2019年及近年我国农药登记情况和特点分析

总结、分析了2019年及近年我国农药登记的基本情况和特点。最近7年来,每年微毒/低毒农药登记数量与当年农药登记总量的比值,及与本年度新增登记数量的比值均持续上升,其比值的年均值分别为82.0%和93.4%;环境友好的剂型在迅速增加,悬浮剂与本年度新增产品登记数量的比值一直处于领先位置,可分散油悬浮剂的比值增长突显,乳油比值在逐年递减;杀虫剂、杀菌剂和除草剂3大类农药登记数量与本年度新增登记数量的比值趋向显著平均;低风险的新农药登记数量在不断增加,生物源农药登记数量增长稳定,5年来其有效成分和产品的年均增长率分别为9.88%和9.46%。从政策和技术上促进特色小宗作物用药登记产品数量快速增加。上述特点表明,我国农药正朝着有利于人畜健康和生态环境安全的方向发展。     

Toxicity of diafenthiuron to honey bees in laboratory,semi‐field and field conditions

BACKGROUND: Cardamom, an important spice crop often attacked by many insect pests, is controlled mainly using synthetic insecticides. As honey bees play a vital role in pollination in cardamom, the impact of insecticides on honey bees needs to be explored to assess its safety. RESULTS: Risk assessment based on contact toxicity revealed diafenthiuron to be a non‐selective insecticide to bees with a low selectivity ratio (the ratio between the LD₅₀ for beneficial and pest species). A dose of diafenthiuron that killed 90% of cardamom borer, Conogethes punctiferalis Guenee, was found to kill 100% of Indian bees. Based on the hazard ratio (the ratio between the field‐recommended dose and the LD₅₀ for the beneficial), diafenthiuron was found to be slightly to moderately toxic to bees. Diafenthiuron, even at low concentrations of LC₁ (the concentration that killed 1% of bees), was found to affect the foraging and homing behaviour of Indian bees. Of bees fed with 30 µg mL^?1 of diafenthiuron, 40% were found missing on the third day after exposure. However, diafenthiuron did not affect bee visits to the cardamom fields. CONCLUSION: Diafenthiuron is more highly toxic to Apis cerana indica F. than to C. punctiferalis by contact, using selectivity ratio and probit substitution methods of risk assessment, but the hazard ratio revealed diafenthiuron to be a slightly to moderately toxic chemical. Diafenthiuron was found to affect the foraging and homing behaviour of bees at sublethal concentrations. Thus, sublethal effects are more relevant in risk assessment than lethal and acute effects. Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry     

浙江省芹菜中农药多残留水平及累积急性膳食摄入风险初评

为明确浙江省各地区芹菜中农药残留水平以及对人群的膳食摄入风险,采用蔬菜中农药残留的标准检测方法,对在浙江省各地区采集的210个芹菜样品进行了检测,并就其累积急性膳食摄入风险开展了初步评估。结果表明:210个芹菜样品中共检出35种农药,检出率为94.8%,其中杀虫剂23种,杀菌剂11种,除草剂1种;97.1%的样品中的农药残留量低于其在芹菜中的最大残留限量 (MRL),残留水平整体较低;检出4种及4种以上农药残留的样品占总样品量的54%,存在农药多残留现象。采用相对强度系数 (RPF) 法将具有相同作用机制的农药分组,依据各农药的毒理学数据计算了各组农药的累积当量浓度,并针对不同人群进行了累积急性膳食摄入风险评估。结果显示:拟除虫菊酯类、三唑类、有机磷类、烟碱类及氨基甲酸酯类农药对儿童的急性膳食摄入风险 (%ARfD) 分别为60.35%、46.96%、20.15%、20.76%和12.40%;对一般人群分别为51.70%、40.20%、17.25%、17.77%和10.65%;所检出5类农药对各群体的%ARfD值均小于100%,表明芹菜中农药残留量及膳食摄入风险总体处于可接受水平。