MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408885164 · doi:10.1080/10937404.2025.2478963

Properties, mode of insecticidal action, environmental exposure pathways, and uses of the insecticide sulfoxaflor; sulfoxaflor environmental science review part I

2025· review· en· W4408885164 on OpenAlexaff
Keith R. Solomon, John Purdy, Vincent J. Kramer, John P. Giesy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrophic levelEnvironmental chemistryToxicologyPesticideSoil waterAgricultureEcologyChemistryBiologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sulfoxaflor (SFX, CAS# 946578-00-3) is marketed by Corteva Agrisciences Inc. as Isoclast®. SFX is a Group 4C, nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist and is a systemic insecticide that is most active against sucking insects. This paper critically reviews and characterizes the physical and chemical properties of SFX to facilitate development of conceptual models that identify environmental compartments with the greatest potential concentrations and organisms most likely to be exposed. These conceptual models were assessed in a Weight of Evidence (WoE) framework to identify scenarios and organisms at greatest risk. The solubility of SFX in water is approximately 550 mg L− 1 and the POW of 0.8, so it will not bioconcentrate or undergo trophic transfer. It has the potential to move in soils, but this is unlikely because of the short half-life (hours to 2–5 days) in agricultural soils where bacteria mediate dissipation. Some of the transformation products of SFX have longer half-lives (months) in soil and are more mobile but are less toxic and not a concern for adverse effects. SFX does not undergo significant photolysis or hydrolysis in water, but this does not lead to a risk in aquatic systems because it is not approved for over-water use and the label recommends buffer zones to protect sensitive aquatic areas. Overall, use of SFX under good agricultural practices is unlikely to result in biologically relevant exposures in non-target species or areas in the environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part BSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207