Cumulative toxicity of neonicotinoid insecticide mixtures to <i>Chironomus dilutus</i> under acute exposure scenarios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extensive agricultural use of neonicotinoid insecticide products has resulted in the presence of neonicotinoid mixtures in surface waters worldwide. Although many aquatic insect species are known to be sensitive to neonicotinoids, the impact of neonicotinoid mixtures is poorly understood. In the present study, the cumulative toxicities of binary and ternary mixtures of select neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, clothianidin, and thiamethoxam) were characterized under acute (96-h) exposure scenarios using the larval midge Chironomus dilutus as a representative aquatic insect species. Using the MIXTOX approach, predictive parametric models were fitted and statistically compared with observed toxicity in subsequent mixture tests. Single-compound toxicity tests yielded median lethal concentration (LC50) values of 4.63, 5.93, and 55.34 μg/L for imidacloprid, clothianidin, and thiamethoxam, respectively. Because of the similar modes of action of neonicotinoids, concentration-additive cumulative mixture toxicity was the predicted model. However, we found that imidacloprid-clothianidin mixtures demonstrated response-additive dose-level-dependent synergism, clothianidin-thiamethoxam mixtures demonstrated concentration-additive synergism, and imidacloprid-thiamethoxam mixtures demonstrated response-additive dose-ratio-dependent synergism, with toxicity shifting from antagonism to synergism as the relative concentration of thiamethoxam increased. Imidacloprid-clothianidin-thiamethoxam ternary mixtures demonstrated response-additive synergism. These results indicate that, under acute exposure scenarios, the toxicity of neonicotinoid mixtures to C. dilutus cannot be predicted using the common assumption of additive joint activity. Indeed, the overarching trend of synergistic deviation emphasizes the need for further research into the ecotoxicological effects of neonicotinoid insecticide mixtures in field settings, the development of better toxicity models for neonicotinoid mixture exposures, and the consideration of mixture effects when setting water quality guidelines for this class of pesticides. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:3091-3101. © 2017 SETAC.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".