140
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Systemic insecticides (neonicotinoids and fipronil): trends, uses, mode of action and metabolites

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references260

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Selective toxicity of neonicotinoids attributable to specificity of insect and mammalian nicotinic receptors.

          Neonicotinoids, the most important new class of synthetic insecticides of the past three decades, are used to control sucking insects both on plants and on companion animals. Imidacloprid (the principal example), nitenpyram, acetamiprid, thiacloprid, thiamethoxam, and others act as agonists at the insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR). The botanical insecticide nicotine acts at the same target without the neonicotinoid level of effectiveness or safety. Fundamental differences between the nAChRs of insects and mammals confer remarkable selectivity for the neonicotinoids. Whereas ionized nicotine binds at an anionic subsite in the mammalian nAChR, the negatively tipped ("magic" nitro or cyano) neonicotinoids interact with a proposed unique subsite consisting of cationic amino acid residue(s) in the insect nAChR. Knowledge reviewed here of the functional architecture and molecular aspects of the insect and mammalian nAChRs and their neonicotinoid-binding site lays the foundation for continued development and use of this new class of safe and effective insecticides.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Resistance of insect pests to neonicotinoid insecticides: current status and future prospects.

            The first neonicotinoid insecticide introduced to the market was imidacloprid in 1991 followed by several others belonging to the same chemical class and with the same mode of action. The development of neonicotinoid insecticides has provided growers with invaluable new tools for managing some of the world's most destructive crop pests, primarily those of the order Hemiptera (aphids, whiteflies, and planthoppers) and Coleoptera (beetles), including species with a long history of resistance to earlier-used products. To date, neonicotinoids have proved relatively resilient to the development of resistance, especially when considering aphids such as Myzus persicae and Phorodon humuli. Although the susceptibility of M. persicae may vary up to 20-fold between populations, this does not appear to compromise the field performance of neonicotinoids. Stronger resistance has been confirmed in some populations of the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci, and the Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata. Resistance in B- and Q-type B. tabaci appears to be linked to enhanced oxidative detoxification of neonicotinoids due to overexpression of monooxygenases. No evidence for target-site resistance has been found in whiteflies, whereas the possibility of target-site resistance in L. decemlineata is being investigated further. Strategies to combat neonicotinoid resistance must take account of the cross-resistance characteristics of these mechanisms, the ecology of target pests on different host plants, and the implications of increasing diversification of the neonicotinoid market due to a continuing introduction of new molecules. Copyright 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Discovery and characterization of sulfoxaflor, a novel insecticide targeting sap-feeding pests.

              The discovery of sulfoxaflor [N-[methyloxido[1-[6-(trifluoromethyl)-3-pyridinyl]ethyl]-λ(4)-sulfanylidene] cyanamide] resulted from an investigation of the sulfoximine functional group as a novel bioactive scaffold for insecticidal activity and a subsequent extensive structure-activity relationship study. Sulfoxaflor, the first product from this new class (the sulfoximines) of insect control agents, exhibits broad-spectrum efficacy against many sap-feeding insect pests, including aphids, whiteflies, hoppers, and Lygus, with levels of activity that are comparable to those of other classes of insecticides targeting sap-feeding insects, including the neonicotinoids. However, no cross-resistance has been observed between sulfoxaflor and neonicotinoids such as imidacloprid, apparently the result of differences in susceptibility to oxidative metabolism. Available data are consistent with sulfoxaflor acting via the insect nicotinic receptor in a complex manner. These observations reflect the unique structure of the sulfoximines compared with neonicotinoids.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +32 486 973 920 , noa.simondelso@student.uclouvain.be
                Journal
                Environ Sci Pollut Res Int
                Environ Sci Pollut Res Int
                Environmental Science and Pollution Research International
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0944-1344
                1614-7499
                19 September 2014
                19 September 2014
                2015
                : 22
                : 5-34
                Affiliations
                [ ]Environmental Sciences, Copernicus Institute, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands
                [ ]Beekeeping Research and Information Centre (CARI), Place Croix du Sud 4, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
                [ ]Buglife, Bug House, Ham Lane, Orton Waterville, PE2 5UU Peterborough, UK
                [ ]INRA, UR 406 Abeilles & Environnement, Laboratoire de Toxicologie Environnementale, Site Agroparc, 84000 Avignon, France
                [ ]Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Centre de Biophysique Moléculaire, rue Charles Sadron, 45071 Orléans Cedex 02, France
                [ ]Université du Québec À Montréal, Département des sciences biologiques, Case Postale 8888, succursale Centre-ville, Montréal, Québec Canada H3C 3P8
                [ ]Haereticus Environmental Laboratory, P.O. Box 92, Clifford, VA 24533 USA
                [ ]Veneto Agricoltura, Legnaro, PD Italy
                [ ]Centre for Conservation Science (RSPB), The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG19 2DL UK
                [ ]Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Lensfield Road, CB2 1EW Cambridge, UK
                [ ]Dipartimento di Agronomia Animali Alimenti Risorse Naturali e Ambiente, Università degli Studi di Padova, Agripolis, viale dell’Università 16, 35020 Legnaro, Padova Italy
                [ ]School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9RH UK
                [ ]Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, 1219 Queen Street East, Sault Ste Marie, ON Canada P6A 2E5
                [ ]Department of Entomology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN USA
                [ ]Department of System Ecotoxicology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
                [ ]Healthy Reefs for Healthy People Initiative, Smithsonian Institution, Belize City, Belize
                [ ]Pierre Mineau Consulting, 124 Creekside Drive, Salt Spring Island, V8K 2E4 Canada
                [ ]Laboratory of Soil Biology, University of Neuchatel, Rue Emile Argand 11, 2000 Neuchatel, Switzerland
                [ ]Jardin Botanique de Neuchâtel, Chemin du Perthuis-du-Sault 58, 2000 Neuchâtel, Switzerland
                [ ]Department of Biology and School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, 112 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5E2 Canada
                [ ]Kijani, Oud Blaricumerweg 36b, 1411JT Naarden, The Netherlands
                [ ]UFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Str. 4, 06120 Halle, Germany
                [ ]German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Deutscher Platz 5e, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
                [ ]Puyallup Research and Extension Centre, Washington State University, Puyallup, WA 98371 USA
                [ ]Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche, Università degli Studi di Padova, via Marzolo 1, 35131 Padova, Italy
                [ ]Behavioural Ecology and Conservation Group, Biodiversity Research Centre, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCL), Croix du Sud 4-5 bte L7.07.04, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
                [ ]Scientific Advisor, Hassellstr. 23, 29223 Celle, Germany
                [ ]Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Postboks 7805, 5020 Bergen, Norway
                [ ]School of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA UK
                Author notes

                Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

                Article
                3470
                10.1007/s11356-014-3470-y
                4284386
                25233913
                846a2412-54c8-4af4-95ba-ed4c5d1aec6d
                © The Author(s) 2014

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.

                History
                : 4 May 2014
                : 15 August 2014
                Categories
                Worldwide Integrated Assessment of the Impact of Systemic Pesticides on Biodiversity and Ecosystems
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

                General environmental science
                neonicotinoid,fipronil,trends,mechanism of action,agriculture,seed treatment,systemic insecticides,metabolites

                Comments

                Comment on this article