The Sulfoximine Insecticide Sulfoxaflor and Its Photodegradate Demonstrate Acute Toxicity to the Nontarget Invertebrate Species <i>Daphnia magna</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The environmental fate and persistence of sulfoxaflor is of significant interest given the potential for the insecticide to impact nontarget organisms, particularly pollinating and aquatic species. In the present study we examine the potential for sulfoxaflor, a new sulfoximine insecticide, to undergo degradation and transformation in sediments and the aquatic environment. Following application of the active substance as a foliar spray or seed coating, sulfoxaflor can be found in the soil at a mass percentage of up to 61% of the total applied concentration. The low soil sorption coefficient (KD) of sulfoxaflor of 0.103 signifies the potential for sulfoxaflor to undergo transport into nearby surface waters via groundwater run-off. In soils and sediments sulfoxaflor produces a sulfoxaflor-urea analog with a varying half-life of 5.0 to 8.5 d depending on the sediment type. Once in surface waters, sulfoxaflor can undergo photolysis to a sulfoxaflor alcohol derivative with a half-life of 35 h. The photodegradate demonstrates reduced aquatic toxicity to Daphnia magna, but the photolytic half-life may be too long to mitigate the acute toxicity of the parent substance sulfoxaflor to D. magna, which was found to have a 48-h median effect concentration of 361 µg/L. Environ Toxicol Chem 2021;40:2156–2164. © 2021 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".