5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Acute oral toxicity of pesticide combination (acephate 50% and imidacloprid 1.8% as active ingredients) in Sprague-Dawley rats

      Read this article at

      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

          Aim:

          The aim of this study was to assess the acute toxic interaction and lethal dose (LD 50) of pesticide combination product (acephate 50% and imidacloprid 1.8% as active ingredients) available in the market in Sprague-Dawley female rats by oral route.

          Materials and Methods:

          A total of 10 Sprague-Dawley female rats were divided into two groups, comprising five rats in each dose group. Both groups were identified as control and test groups, respectively. Control group received sterile water as vehicle and test group received pesticide combination (acephate 50% and imidacloprid 1.8% as active ingredients) at a dose of 0 and 2000 mg/kg body weight. As per the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Guideline 420, initially one animal each from both the control and test groups were dosed with 0 and 2000 mg/kg, respectively, as sighting study. Based on the results of sighting study, additionally, four animals each from both groups were dosed with the same dose to make a total of five animals in each group. Dose volume was constant as 10 mL/kg. All animals were observed daily twice for clinical signs and mortality. Body weight was recorded on day 0 and weekly thereafter during 14 days’ observation period; last body weight (fasted) was recorded on day 15. All the rats of both the groups were humanely sacrificed on day 15 for gross pathology, collection of organs for histopathology, organ weighing, and morphometry. Organ weights were taken as absolute values, and relative organ weights to last fasted body weights were calculated.

          Results:

          Pesticide combination (acephate 50% and imidacloprid 1.8% as active ingredients) treated rats showed cholinergic signs with one mortality in the test group. No significant difference was observed in body weight, relative organ weights, and organ morphometry between pesticide combination exposed and non-exposed groups. Gross pathology of the treated rats was also comparable with respect to control group. Histopathological changes in the liver, kidneys, heart, lung, adrenaline, spleen, and ovaries of test group rats were found to be comparable with control group rats.

          Conclusion:

          The present study demonstrated the LD 50 of one of the combination products available in the market having acephate 50% and imidacloprid 1.8% as active ingredients in Sprague-Dawley female rats which is >2000 mg/kg body weight. Furthermore, gross, histopathology and histoarchitectural alterations of all the vital organs of the test group were comparable to the control.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Farmers’ Exposure to Pesticides: Toxicity Types and Ways of Prevention

          Synthetic pesticides are extensively used in agriculture to control harmful pests and prevent crop yield losses or product damage. Because of high biological activity and, in certain cases, long persistence in the environment, pesticides may cause undesirable effects to human health and to the environment. Farmers are routinely exposed to high levels of pesticides, usually much greater than those of consumers. Farmers’ exposure mainly occurs during the preparation and application of the pesticide spray solutions and during the cleaning-up of spraying equipment. Farmers who mix, load, and spray pesticides can be exposed to these chemicals due to spills and splashes, direct spray contact as a result of faulty or missing protective equipment, or even drift. However, farmers can be also exposed to pesticides even when performing activities not directly related to pesticide use. Farmers who perform manual labor in areas treated with pesticides can face major exposure from direct spray, drift from neighboring fields, or by contact with pesticide residues on the crop or soil. This kind of exposure is often underestimated. The dermal and inhalation routes of entry are typically the most common routes of farmers’ exposure to pesticides. Dermal exposure during usual pesticide handling takes place in body areas that remain uncovered by protective clothing, such as the face and the hands. Farmers’ exposure to pesticides can be reduced through less use of pesticides and through the correct use of the appropriate type of personal protective equipment in all stages of pesticide handling.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Pesticide Knowledge and Safety Practices among Farm Workers in Kuwait: Results of a Survey

            The unsafe and indiscriminate use of pesticides in agriculture represents a major hazard to the environment and human health. The aim of this study was to assess the levels of knowledge, attitude and practices of Kuwaiti farmers regarding the safe use of pesticides. A total of 250 farmers participated in this study through in-depth interviews and observations on-farm. The majority of the farmers acknowledged that pesticides were harmful to their health (71%) and the environment (65%). However, farmers’ level of knowledge of pesticide safety is insufficient. Over 70% of the farmers did not read or follow pesticide label instructions, and 58% did not use any personal protective equipment (PPE) when handling pesticides. Educated farmers were significantly more likely to use PPE compared with famers with limited formal education (χ2 = 9.89, p < 0.05). Storage of pesticides within living areas was reported by 20% of farmers. When disposing of pesticide wastes, respondents adopted unsafe practices such as discarding, incinerating, or burying empty pesticide containers on-farm, or reusing the containers. Farmers also reported disposing leftover pesticide solution or old pesticide stocks on-farm or in the sewer. A significant number (82%) of the farmers reported at least one symptom of acute pesticide poisoning. Although farmers’ knowledge of pesticide hazards was high, the reported safety measures were poor. Comprehensive intervention measures to reduce the health and environmental risks of pesticides are needed, including pesticide safety training programs for farmers, stringent enforcement of pesticide laws, and promoting integrated pest management and non-synthetic methods of pest control.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Ignoring Adjuvant Toxicity Falsifies the Safety Profile of Commercial Pesticides

              Commercial formulations of pesticides are invariably not single ingredients. Instead they are cocktails of chemicals, composed of a designated pesticidal “active principle” and “other ingredients,” with the latter collectively also known as “adjuvants.” These include surfactants, antifoaming agents, dyes, etc. Some adjuvants are added to influence the absorption and stability of the active principle and thus promote its pesticidal action. Currently, the health risk assessment of pesticides in the European Union and in the United States focuses almost exclusively on the stated active principle. Nonetheless, adjuvants can also be toxic in their own right with numerous negative health effects having been reported in humans and on the environment. Despite the known toxicity of adjuvants, they are regulated differently from active principles, with their toxic effects being generally ignored. Adjuvants are not subject to an acceptable daily intake, and they are not included in the health risk assessment of dietary exposures to pesticide residues. Here, we illustrate this gap in risk assessment by reference to glyphosate, the most used pesticide active ingredient. We also investigate the case of neonicotinoid insecticides, which are strongly suspected to be involved in bee and bumblebee colony collapse disorder. Authors of studies sometimes use the name of the active principle (for example glyphosate) when they are testing a commercial formulation containing multiple (active principle plus adjuvant) ingredients. This results in confusion in the scientific literature and within regulatory circles and leads to a misrepresentation of the safety profile of commercial pesticides. Urgent action is needed to lift the veil on the presence of adjuvants in food and human bodily fluids, as well as in the environment (such as in air, water, and soil) and to characterize their toxicological properties. This must be accompanied by regulatory precautionary measures to protect the environment and general human population from some toxic adjuvants that are currently missing from risk assessments.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Vet World
                Vet World
                Veterinary World
                Veterinary World (India )
                0972-8988
                2231-0916
                September 2018
                18 September 2018
                : 11
                : 9
                : 1291-1297
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Laboratory Animal Facility, ICMR-National Institute of Occupational Health, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
                [2 ]Toxicology Division, ICMR-National Institute of Occupational Health, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
                [3 ]Biostatistics and Data Management Division, ICMR-National Institute of Occupational Health, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
                [4 ]Poison Information Center, ICMR-National Institute of Occupational, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
                Author notes
                Article
                10.14202/vetworld.2018.1291-1297
                6200575
                Copyright: © Palkhade, et al.

                Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                Categories
                Research Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article