Fonofos poisons raptors and waterfowl several months after granular application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From 1994 to 1999 in the Lower Fraser Valley region of southwest Canada, fonofos (Dyfonate G) was recommended for control of introduced wireworm (Agriotes spp.) pests on potato and other root crops. As part of a wildlife-monitoring program, we collected 15 raptors, including 12 bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), found dead or debilitated on or near agricultural lands with severely inhibited brain and/or plasma cholinesterase activity and fonofos residues in ingesta. Bird remains, in nine cases waterfowl, were identified in the ingesta samples. Another seven bald eagles had severe cholinesterase inhibition, but without evidence of fonofos residues. During two winters from 1996 to 1998, 420 ha of potato fields, half of which had been treated the previous spring with fonofos and the remainder untreated, were searched weekly for evidence of wildlife mortality. Search efficiency was assessed with placed duck carcasses. Waterfowl outnumbered other species in field-use counts and comprised the greatest proportion of birds found dead. We found 211 wildlife remains, most scavenged; 35 intact carcasses were suitable for postmortem examination and/or toxicology analyses. Cholinesterase activity was assayed in brains of 18 waterfowl, five of which had severely depressed activity (average inhibition 74%; range, 69-78%). The gastrointestinal tract of a mallard found in a field treated with granular product contained 49 microg/g fonofos residues, linking waterfowl mortality with labelled use of the product. These findings demonstrate the risk of both primary and secondary poisoning by anticholinesterase insecticides where wildlife make intensive use of farmed fields.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".