Soil Dissipation and Leaching Behavior of a Neonicotinoid Insecticide Thiamethoxam

Article

Abstract

Persistence and leaching of thiamethoxam in soil were studied under laboratory conditions. The persistence studies carried out at two fortification levels and under three moisture regimes revealed that thiamethoxam persisted beyond 90 days in all the treatments with half-life varying from 46.3 to 301.0 days. Under dry conditions, the dissipation was faster at 10 mg kg−1 level as compared to 1 mg kg−1, whereas the reverse trend was observed under field capacity moisture and submerged conditions. The effect of moisture was prominent and longer persistence was observed under dry conditions (t1/2 200.7–301.0 days) followed by field capacity moisture (t1/2 91.2–94.1 days) and submerged condition (t1/2 46.3–75.3 days). The leaching experiment carried out under laboratory conditions showed that on leaching the soil column with water equivalent to 65 cm rainfall, 66–79% of the applied thiamethoxam was recovered from leachate and no residues were detected in soil. Results showed that thiamethoxam has a potential to leach down under heavy rainfall conditions.

Keywords

Thiamethoxam Dissipation Moisture regimes Leaching Alluvial soil 

References

  1. Brian AN, Alan GT, Michael U, Tom R, William DH (2004) Neonicotinoid seed treatments for managing potato leafhopper infestations in snap bean. Crop Prot 23:147–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Choudhury BK, Awasthi MD (2000) Persistence and degradation of chlorothalonil under different soil moisture regimes. Pestic Res J 12:170–173Google Scholar
  3. Drinkwater TW (2003) Bioassays to compare the systemic activity of three neonicotinoids for control of Heteronychus arator Fabricius (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in maize. Crop Prot 22:989–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Farmer WJ, Igue K, Martin JP (1972) Volatility of organochlorine insecticides from soil. I Effiect of concentration, temperature, air-flow rate and vapour pressure. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 36:443–447Google Scholar
  5. Gajbhiye VT, Agnihotri NP (1998) Volatilization of DDT from soil. Indian J Entomol 60:184–202Google Scholar
  6. Gupta S, Gajbhiye VT (2002) Persistence and leaching behavior of β-cyfluthrin in alluvial soil of India. Pest Manag Sci 58:1259–1265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gupta S, Gajbhiye VT, Agnihotri NP (2001) Adsorption-desorption, persistence and leaching behavior of flufenacet in alluvial soil of India. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 66:9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gupta S, Gajbhiye VT, Kalpana, Agnihotri NP (2002) Leaching behavior of imidacloprid formulations in soil. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 68:502–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Karmakar R, Singh SB, Kulshrestha G (2006) Persistence and transformation of thiamethoxam, a neonicotinoid insecticide, in soil of different agroclimatic zones of India. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 76:400–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Krishnaiah NV, Prasad ASR, Lingaiah T, Kumar KM (2003) Utilization of thiamethoxam and imidacloprid for the management of insect pest complex in rice. Indian J Plant Protec 31:51–55Google Scholar
  11. Kubiak R, Muller T, Eichhorn KW, Albaiges J (1995) Volatilization of pesticides from plant and soil surfaces – field versus laboratory experiments. Int J Environ Anal Chem 58:349–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kulshrestha G, Singh SB (1992) Influence of soil moisture and microbial activity on pendimethalin degradation. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 48:269–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ma Q, Rahman A, Holland PT, James TK, McNaughton DE (2004) Field dissipation of acetochlor in two New Zealand soils at two application rates. J Environ Qual 33:930–938Google Scholar
  14. Misra HP (2002) Field evaluation of some newer insecticides against aphids (Aphis gossypii) and jassids (Amrasca biguttula) on okra. Indian J Entomol 64:80–84Google Scholar
  15. Monkiedje A, Ilori MO, Spiteller M (2002) Soil quality changes resulting from the application of the fungicides mefenoxam and metalaxyl to a sandy loam soil. Soil Biol Biochem 34:1939–1948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nash RG (1983) Comparitive volatilization and dissipation rates of several pesticides from soil. J Agric Food Chem 53:650–655Google Scholar
  17. Patel NC, Kher RH, Chavda AJ, Patel JR (2003) Bio-efficacy of thiamethoxam (Actara 25 WG) in comparison to conventional insecticides against hopper, Amritodus atkinsoni infesting mango. Indian J Entomol 65:315–318Google Scholar
  18. Pradas EG, Perez MF, Sanchez MV, Cespedes FF (1999) Mobility of imidacloprid from alginate-bentonite controlled release formulations in greenhouse soils. Pestic Sci 55:1109–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Satpute NS, Katole SR, Nimbalkar SA, Sarnaik DN, Satpute US (2001) Efficacy of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam seed treatment against cotton jassid, Amarasca devastans Distant. J Appl Zool Res 12:88–90Google Scholar
  20. Whitmyre GK, Ross JH, Lunchick C, Volger B, Singer S (2004) Biphasic dissipation kinetics for dislodgeable foliar residues in estimating post application occupational exposures to endosulfan. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 46:17–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Willis GH, Parr JF, Smith S, Carroll BR (1972) Volatilization of dieldrin from fallow soil as affected by different soil water regimes. J Environ Qual 1:193–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Agricultural ChemicalsIndian Agricultural Research InstituteNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations