Clothianidin in agricultural soils and uptake into corn pollen and canola nectar after multiyear seed treatment applications

52Citations
Citations of this article
79Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Limited data are available on the fate of clothianidin under realistic agricultural production conditions. The present study is the first large-scale assessment of clothianidin residues in soil and bee-relevant matrices from corn and canola fields after multiple years of seed-treatment use. The average soil concentration from 50 Midwest US corn fields with 2 yr to 11 yr of planting clothianidin-treated seeds was 7.0ng/g, similar to predicted concentrations from a single planting of Poncho 250-treated corn seeds (6.3ng/g). The water-extractable (i.e., plant-bioavailable) clothianidin residues in soil were only 10% of total residues. Clothianidin concentrations in soil reached a plateau concentration (amount applied equals amount dissipated) in fields with 4 or more application years. Concentrations in corn pollen from these fields were low (mean: 1.8ng/g) with no correlation to total years of use or soil concentrations. For canola, soil concentrations from 27 Canadian fields with 2 yr to 4 yr of seed treatment use (mean=5.7ng/g) were not correlated with use history, and plant bioavailability was 6% of clothianidin soil residues. Average canola nectar concentrations were 0.6ng/g and not correlated to use history or soil concentrations. Under typical cropping practices, therefore, clothianidin residues are not accumulating significantly in soil, plant bioavailability of residues in soil is limited, and exposure to pollinators will not increase over time in fields receiving multiple applications of clothianidin.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Xu, T., Dyer, D. G., Mcconnell, L. L., Bondarenko, S., Allen, R., & Heinemann, O. (2016). Clothianidin in agricultural soils and uptake into corn pollen and canola nectar after multiyear seed treatment applications. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 35(2), 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3281

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free