Lethal and Sublethal Toxicity of Thiamethoxam and Clothianidin Commercial Formulations to Soil Invertebrates in a Natural Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The use of neonicotinoids in agriculture is a critical environmental protection issue. Although there has been considerable research on pollinator exposure and aquatic toxicological effects, few studies have investigated the chronic impacts on soil-dwelling species. Given the application of neonicotinoids into soil systems, there is the potential for risk to soil invertebrates. The toxicity of 2 commercial formulations containing the active ingredients (a.i.) thiamethoxam (Actara® 240SC) or clothianidin (Titan™) was investigated using 3 soil invertebrate species: Oppia nitens, Eisenia andrei, and Folsomia candida. No adverse effects were observed for O. nitens at the highest tested concentrations (≥92 mg a.i./kg dry soil) after a 28-d exposure. Exposure to clothianidin resulted in a 28-d median inhibitory concentration (IC50) of 0.069 (95% confidence limits: 0.039–0.12) mg/kg dry soil for F. candida, and a 56-d IC50 of 0.26 (0.22–3.2) mg a.i./kg dry soil for E. andrei. Exposure to thiamethoxam was less toxic, with IC50s of 0.36 (0.19–0.66) and 3.0 (2.2–4.0) mg a.i./kg dry soil for F. candida and E. andrei reproduction, respectively. The observed toxicity for F. candida adult survival and reproduction and for E. andrei reproduction occurred at environmentally relevant concentrations. However, because clothianidin is a degradation product of thiamethoxam, and detection of clothianidin rose to levels of concern in the thiamethoxam-amended soils over time, the observed toxicity may be partly attributed to the presence of clothianidin. Environ Toxicol Chem 2019;38:2111–2120. © 2019 Crown in the right of Canada. Published by Wiley Periodicals Inc. on behalf of 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) | 0.000 | 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".