Vignette d'image

Mitchell, Edward

Nom
Mitchell, Edward
Affiliation principale
Site web
Fonction
Professeur ordinaire
Email
edward.mitchell@unine.ch
Identifiants
https://libra.unine.ch/handle/123456789/357
_
0000-0003-0358-506X

Résultat de la recherche

Filtres

3
3
Réinitialiser les filtres

Paramètres

Voici les éléments 1 - 3 sur 3
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    An update of the Worldwide Integrated Assessment (WIA) on systemic insecticides. Part 2: Impacts on organisms and ecosystems
    (2017-11-9)
    Pisa, Lennard
    ;
    Goulson, Dave
    ;
    Yang, En-Cheng
    ;
    Gibbons, David
    ;
    Sánchez-Bayo, Francisco
    ;
    Mitchell, Edward 
    ;
    Aebi, Alexandre 
    ;
    van der Sluijs, Jeroen
    ;
    MacQuarrie, Chris JK
    ;
    Giorio, Chiara
    ;
    Yim Long, Elizabeth
    ;
    McField, Melanie
    ;
    Bijleveld van Lexmond, Maarten
    ;
    Bonmatin, Jean-Marc
    New information on the lethal and sublethal effects of neonicotinoids and fipronil on organisms is presented in this review, complementing the previous Worldwide Integrated Assessment (WIA) in 2015. The high toxicity of these systemic insecticides to invertebrates has been confirmed and expanded to include more species and compounds. Most of the recent research has focused on bees and the sublethal and ecological impacts these insecticides have on pollinators. Toxic effects on other invertebrate taxa also covered predatory and parasitoid natural enemies and aquatic arthropods. Little new information has been gathered on soil organisms. The impact on marine and coastal ecosystems is still largely uncharted. The chronic lethality of neonicotinoids to insects and crustaceans, and the strengthened evidence that these chemicals also impair the immune system and reproduction, highlights the dangers of this particular insecticidal class (neonicotinoids and fipronil), with the potential to greatly decrease populations of arthropods in both terrestrial and aquatic environments. Sublethal effects on fish, reptiles, frogs, birds, and mammals are also reported, showing a better understanding of the mechanisms of toxicity of these insecticides in vertebrates and their deleterious impacts on growth, reproduction, and neurobehaviour of most of the species tested. This review concludes with a summary of impacts on the ecosystem services and functioning, particularly on pollination, soil biota, and aquatic invertebrate communities, thus reinforcing the previous WIA conclusions (van der Sluijs et al. 2015).
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Systemic insecticides (neonicotinoids and fipronil): trends, uses, mode of action and metabolites
    Simon-Delso, N
    ;
    Amaral-Rogers, V
    ;
    Belzunces, L. P
    ;
    Bonmatin, J. M
    ;
    Chagnon, Madeleine
    ;
    Downs, C. A
    ;
    Furlan, L
    ;
    Gibbons, D. W
    ;
    Giorio, C
    ;
    Girolami, V
    ;
    Goulson, D
    ;
    Kreutzweiser, David. P
    ;
    Krupke, C
    ;
    Liess, M
    ;
    Long, E
    ;
    McField, M
    ;
    Mineau, Pierre
    ;
    Mitchell, Edward 
    ;
    Morrissey, Christy A
    ;
    Noome Dominique A
    ;
    Pisa, L
    ;
    Settele, J
    ;
    Stark, J. D
    ;
    Tapparo, A
    ;
    Van Dyck, H
    ;
    van Praagh, J
    ;
    Van der Sluijs, Jeroen P
    ;
    Whitehorn, P. R
    ;
    Wiemers, M
    Since their discovery in the late 1980s, neonicotinoid pesticides have become the most widely used class of insecticides worldwide, with large-scale applications ranging from plant protection (crops, vegetables, fruits), veterinary products, and biocides to invertebrate pest control in fish farming. In this review, we address the phenyl-pyrazole fipronil together with neonicotinoids because of similarities in their toxicity, physicochemical profiles, and presence in the environment. Neonicotinoids and fipronil currently account for approximately one third of the world insecticide market; the annual world production of the archetype neonicotinoid, imidacloprid, was estimated to be ca. 20,000 tonnes active substance in 2010. There were several reasons for the initial success of neonicotinoids and fipronil: (1) there was no known pesticide resistance in target pests, mainly because of their recent development, (2) their physicochemical properties included many advantages over previous generations of insecticides (i.e., organophosphates, carbamates, pyrethroids, etc.), and (3) they shared an assumed reduced operator and consumer risk. Due to their systemic nature, they are taken up by the roots or leaves and translocated to all parts of the plant, which, in turn, makes them effectively toxic to herbivorous insects. The toxicity persists for a variable period of time—depending on the plant, its growth stage, and the amount of pesticide applied. A wide variety of applications are available, including the most common prophylactic non-Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) application by seed coating. As a result of their extensive use and physicochemical properties, these substances can be found in all environmental compartments including soil, water, and air. Neonicotinoids and fipronil operate by disrupting neural transmission in the central nervous system of invertebrates. Neonicotinoids mimic the action of neurotransmitters, while fipronil inhibits neuronal receptors. In doing so, they continuously stimulate neurons leading ultimately to death of target invertebrates. Like virtually all insecticides, they can also have lethal and sublethal impacts on non-target organisms, including insect predators and vertebrates. Furthermore, a range of synergistic effects with other stressors have been documented. Here, we review extensively their metabolic pathways, showing how they form both compound-specific and common metabolites which can themselves be toxic. These may result in prolonged toxicity. Considering their wide commercial expansion, mode of action, the systemic properties in plants, persistence and environmental fate, coupled with limited information about the toxicity profiles of these compounds and their metabolites, neonicotinoids and fipronil may entail significant risks to the environment. A global evaluation of the potential collateral effects of their use is therefore timely. The present paper and subsequent chapters in this review of the global literature explore these risks and show a growing body of evidence that persistent, low concentrations of these insecticides pose serious risks of undesirable environmental impacts.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Environmental fate and exposure; neonicotinoids and fipronil
    Bonmatin, J. M
    ;
    Giorio, C
    ;
    Girolami, V
    ;
    Goulson, D
    ;
    Kreutzweiser, David. P
    ;
    Krupke, C
    ;
    Liess, M
    ;
    Long, E
    ;
    Marzaro, M
    ;
    Mitchell, Edward 
    ;
    Noome Dominique A
    ;
    Simon-Delso, N
    ;
    Tapparo, A
    Systemic insecticides are applied to plants using a wide variety of methods, ranging from foliar sprays to seed treatments and soil drenches. Neonicotinoids and fipronil are among the most widely used pesticides in the world. Their popularity is largely due to their high toxicity to invertebrates, the ease and flexibility with which they can be applied, their long persistence, and their systemic nature, which ensures that they spread to all parts of the target crop. However, these properties also increase the probability of environmental contamination and exposure of nontarget organisms. Environmental contamination occurs via a number of routes including dust generated during drilling of dressed seeds, contamination and accumulation in arable soils and soil water, runoff into waterways, and uptake of pesticides by nontarget plants via their roots or dust deposition on leaves. Persistence in soils, waterways, and nontarget plants is variable but can be prolonged; for example, the half-lives of neonicotinoids in soils can exceed 1,000 days, so they can accumulate when used repeatedly. Similarly, they can persist in woody plants for periods exceeding 1 year. Breakdown results in toxic metabolites, though concentrations of these in the environment are rarely measured. Overall, there is strong evidence that soils, waterways, and plants in agricultural environments and neighboring areas are contaminated with variable levels of neonicotinoids or fipronil mixtures and their metabolites (soil, parts per billion (ppb)-parts per million (ppm) range; water, parts per trillion (ppt)-ppb range; and plants, ppb-ppm range). This provides multiple routes for chronic (and acute in some cases) exposure of nontarget animals. For example, pollinators are exposed through direct contact with dust during drilling; consumption of pollen, nectar, or guttation drops from seed-treated crops, water, and consumption of contaminated pollen and nectar from wild flowers and trees growing near-treated crops. Studies of food stores in honeybee colonies from across the globe demonstrate that colonies are routinely and chronically exposed to neonicotinoids, fipronil, and their metabolites (generally in the 1–100 ppb range), mixed with other pesticides some of which are known to act synergistically with neonicotinoids. Other nontarget organisms, particularly those inhabiting soils, aquatic habitats, or herbivorous insects feeding on noncrop plants in farmland, will also inevitably receive exposure, although data are generally lacking for these groups. We summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the environmental fate of these compounds by outlining what is known about the chemical properties of these compounds, and placing these properties in the context of modern agricultural practices.