Advertisement

Human Health Effects Resulting from Exposure to Bacillus thuringiensis Applied during Insect Control Programmes

  • David B. Levin
Part of the Progress in Biological Control book series (PIBC, volume 6)

Abstract

Products based on Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) such as Foray 48B, which contains Bt kurstaki strain HD-1, must meet rigorous standards required by the US Environmental Protection Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration, the Canadian Pesticide Management and Regulatory Agency, and Health Canada, before they are approved for commercial use in Canada and the US. These agencies consider Bt-based products to be neither toxic nor pathogenic to mammals, including humans. Despite these approvals, there remains widespread public concern about negative health effects associated with aerial applications of Btk during insect control programmes. Major health impact assessment studies in the US and Canada suggested there were no negative short-term human health effects associated with aerial applications of Foray 48B. A similar health impact assessment conducted in New Zealand reported short term irritant effects and some worsening of pre-existing conditions such as allergies and asthma. These findings warrant further investigation following aerial applications of commercial Bt products in populated urban areas.

Keywords

Bacillus Thuringiensis British Columbia Gypsy Moth Peak Expiratory Flow Rate Health Impact Assessment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aeraqua Medical Services (2001) Health surveillance following Operation EverGreen: A programme to eradicate the white-spotted tussock moth from the eastern suburbs of Auckland. Report to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. 60 pp + AppendicesGoogle Scholar
  2. Aeraqua Medical Services (2005a) A study of presentations of householder concerns to the painted apple moth (PAM) health service and Auckland summer symptom survey. Report to AgriQuality Ltd. 131 pp http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/painted-apple-moth/pam-health-report-appendix.pdf
  3. Aeraqua Medical Services (2005b) A comparison of presentations of householder concerns to the painted apple moth (PAM) and Asian gypsy moth (AGM) health services. Report to AgriQuality Ltd. 68 pp http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/painted-apple-moth/pam-health-report-appendix.pdf
  4. Anonymous (1993) Report of health surveillance activities: Gypsy Moth control program. Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Washington State Department of HealthGoogle Scholar
  5. Ash, C, Farrow JAE, Wallbanks S, Collins MD (1991) Phylogenetic heterogeneity of the genus Bacillus revealed by comparative analysis of small subunit ribosomal RNA sequences. Lett Appl Micro 13:202–206Google Scholar
  6. Bavykin SG, Lysov YP, Zakhariev V, Kelly JJ, Jackman J, Stahl DA, Cherni A (2006) Use of 16S rRNA, 23S rRNA, and gyrB gene sequence analysis to determine phylogenetic relationships of Bacillus cereus group microorganisms. J Clin Micro 42:3711–3730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernstein IL, Bernstein JA, Miller M, Tierzieva S, Bernstein DI, Lummus Z, Selgrade MK, Doerfler DL, Seligy VL (1999) Immune responses in farmworkers after exposure to Bacillus thuringiensis pesticides. Environ Health Persp 107:575–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. British Columbia Ministry of Forest and Range (2007) History of Gypsy Moth Infestations in British Columbia. http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/gypsymoth/history.htm [accessed 17 March 2008]
  9. Carlson CR, Kolsto AB (1993) A complete physical map of a Bacillus thuringiensis chromosome. J Bacteriol 175:1053–1060PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlson CR, Caugant DA, Kolsto A-B (1994) Genotypic diversity among Bacillus cereus and Bacillus thuringiensis strains. Appl Environ Microbiol 60:1719–1725PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Damgaard PH (1995) Diarrheal enterotoxin production by strains of Bacillus thuringiensis isolated from commercial Bacillus thuringiensis-based pesticides. FEMS Immunol. Medical Microbiol 12:245–250Google Scholar
  12. de Amorim GV, Whittome B, Shore B, Levin DB (2001) Identification of Bacillus thuringiensis subspecies Kurstaki strain HD1-like bacteria from environmental and human samples after aerial spraying of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada with Foray 48B. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:1035–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doekes G, Larsen P, Sigsgaard T, Baelum J (2004) IgE sensitization to bacterial and fungal biopesticides in a cohort of Danish greenhouse workers: the BIOGART study. Am J Indust Med 46:404–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fisher R, Rosner L (1959) Toxicology of microbial insecticide Thuricide. Agric Food Chem 17:686–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ginsberg C (2006) Aerial spraying of Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki (Btk). J Pestic Reform 20:13–16Google Scholar
  16. Green M, Heumann M, Sokolow R, Foster LR, Bryant, R, Skeels M (1990) Public health implications of the microbial pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis: an epidemiological study, Oregon, 1985–1986. Am J Pub Health 80:848–852PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hernandez E, Ramisse F, Cruel T, Ducoureau JP, Alonso JM, Cavallo JD (1998) Bacillus thuringiensis serovar H34-konkurkian superinfection: report of one case and experimental evidence of pathogenicity in immunosuppressed mice. J Clin Microbiol 36:2138–2139PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hernandez E, Ramisse F, Cruel T, le Vagueresse R, Cavallo JD (1999) Bacillus thuringiensis H34 isolated from human and insecticidal sero-types 3a3b and H14 can lead to death of immunocompetent mice after pulmonary infection. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 24:43–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hu X, Hansen BM, Hendriksen NB, Yuan Z (2006) Detection and phylogenic analysis of one anthrax virulence plasmid pXO1 conservative open reading frame ubiquitous presented within Bacillus cereus group strains. Biochem Biophys Res Comm 349:1214–1219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ivanova N, Sorokin A, Anderson I, Galleron N, Candelon B, Kapatral V, Bhattacharyya A, Reznik G, Mikhailova N, Lapidus A, Chu L, Mazur M, Goltsman E, Larsen N, D’Souza M, Walunas T, Grechkin Y, Pusch G, Haselkorn R, Fonstein M, Ehrlich SD, Overbeek R, Kyrpides N (2003) Genome sequence of Bacillus cereus and comparative analysis with Bacillus anthracis. Nature 423(6935):87–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jackson SG, Goodbrand RB, Ahmed R, Kasatiya S (1995) Bacillus cereus and Bacillus thuringiensis isolated in a gastroenteritis outbreak investigation. Lett Appl Microbiol 21:103–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jensen GB, Larsen P, Jacobsen BL, Madsen B, Wilcks A, Smidt L, Andrup L (2002a) Isolation and characterization of Bacillus cereus-like bacteria from faecal samples from greenhouse workers who are using Bacillus thuringiensis-based insecticides. Internat Arch Occup Environ Health 75:191–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jensen GB, Larsen P, Jacobsen BL, Madsen B, Smidt L, Andrup L (2002b) Bacillus thuringiensis in fecal samples from greenhouse workers after exposure to B. thuringiensis-based pesticides. Appl Environ Microbiol 68:4900–4905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leonard C, Yahua C, Mahilion J (1997) Diversity and distribution of IS231, IS232, and IS240 among B. cereus, B. thuringiensis, and B. mycoides. Microbiol 143:2537–2547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Logan NA, Turnbull PCB (1999) Bacillus and recently derived Genera. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Pfaller MA, Turnover FC, Yolken RH (eds) Manual of clinical microbiology. ASM Press, Washington, D.C. pp 357–369Google Scholar
  26. McClintock JT, Schaffer CR, Sjoblad RD (1995) A comparative review of the mammalian toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis-based pesticides. Pestic Sci 45:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. New Zealand Ministry of Health (2003) Human health considerations in the use of Btk-based insecticide Foray 48B for Asian gypsy moth in Hamilton. Summary report prepared for the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Agiculture and Forestry, and Waikato DHB Public Health Unit. October 2003. Auckland Regional Public Health Service. Report can be accessed at http:///www.moh.govt.nz [accessed March 17 2008]
  28. New Zealand Ministry of Health (2004) Report on the effects of the painted apple moth spray programme. Media release, April 27 2004 http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh/nsf/pagesmh/3019?Open. [accessed 17 March 2008]
  29. Noble MA, Riben PD, Cook GJ (1992) Microbiological and epidemiological surveillance programme to monitor the health effects of Foray 48B Btk spray. Report to the British Columbia Ministry of Forests, September 30 1992Google Scholar
  30. Noble MA, Kandola P, Amos M, Riben P, Cook G, Shaw C (1994) Cluster analysis of community retrieved isolates of Bacillus thuringiensis var kurstaki (BTK). 93rd General Meeting for the American Society of Microbiology. Las Vegas, Nevada. May 4 1994Google Scholar
  31. O’Callaghan M, Glare TR (2003) Mammalian safety of Bacillus thuringiensis. In: Akhurst RJ, Beard CE, Hughes P (eds) Proc 4th Pacific Rim Conf. CSIRO pp 254–261Google Scholar
  32. Pearce M, Behie G, Chappell N (2002a) The effects of aerial spraying with Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki on area residents. Environ Health Rev 46:19–22Google Scholar
  33. Pearce M, Habbick B, Williams J (2002b) The effects of aerial spraying with Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki on children with asthma. Can J Public Health 93:21–25Google Scholar
  34. Petrie K, Thomas M, Broadbent E (2003) Symptom complaints following aerial spraying with biological insecticide Foray 48B. J NZ Med Assoc 14th March 116(1170):1–7Google Scholar
  35. Perani M, Bishop AH, Vaid A (1998) Prevalence of β-exotoxin, diarrheal toxin and specific δ-endotoxin in natural isolates of Bacillus thuringiensis. FEMS Microbiol Lett 160:55–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Richardson B, Kay MK, Kimberley MO, Charles JG, Gresham BA (2005) Evaluating the benefits of dose-response bioassays during aerial pest eradication operations. NZ Plant Prot 58:17–23Google Scholar
  37. Samples JR, Buettner H (1983) Ocular infection caused by a biological insecticide. J Infect Dis 148: 614PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Schnepf E, Crickmore N, Van Rie J, Lereclus D, Baum J, Feitelson J, Zeigler DR, Dean DH (1998) Bacillus thuringiensis and its pesticidal crystal proteins. Microbiol Molec Biol Rev 62:775–806Google Scholar
  39. Siegel JP (2001) The mammalian safety of Bacillus thuringiensis-based insecticides. J Invertebr Pathol 77:13–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Siegel JP, Shadduck JA (1990) Clearance of Bacillus sphaericus and Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. israelensis from mammals. J Econ Entomol 83:347–355PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Swadner C (1994) Insecticide fact sheet. J Pestic Reform 14:13–20Google Scholar
  42. Swiecicka I, Van der Auwera GA, Mahillon J (2006) Hemolytic and nonhemolytic enterotoxin genes are broadly distributed among Bacillus thuringiensis isolated from wild mammals. Micro Ecol 52:544–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Teschke K, Chow Y, Bartlett K, Ross A, van Netten C (2001) Spatial and temporal distribution of airborne Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki during an aerial spray program for gypsy moth eradication. Environ Health Persp 109:47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Xu D, Côté JC (2003) Phylogenetic relationships between Bacillus species and related genera inferred from comparison of 3 end 16S rDNA and 5 end 16S–23S ITS nucleotide sequences. Internat J Syst Evol Micro 53:695–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yuan YM, Hu XM, Liu HZ, Hansen BM, Yan JP, Yuan ZM (2007) Kinetics of plasmid transfer among Bacillus cereus group strains within lepidopteran larvae. Arch Microbiol 87:425–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • David B. Levin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biosystems EngineeringE2-376 EITC University of ManitobaWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations