Advertisement

Regulatory Requirements for Ecotoxicological Assessments of Microbial Insecticides — How Relevant are They?

  • Stefan T. Jaronski
  • Mark S. Goettel
  • Chris J. Lomer
Chapter
Part of the Progress in Biological Control book series (PIBC, volume 1)

Abstract

Microbial insecticides, as with other pesticides of biological origin, are generally considered to provide an environmentally benign pest control option. However, this does not mean that they are entirely free of hazards to health and the environment. Although the risks may be low, the introduction of any living biological agent into an environment is often an irreversible step (Dent 1999). Also, some generalist microbial pathogens are infectious to both vertebrates and invertebrates. Regulation of microbial pesticides is therefore necessary to protect the health and safety of consumers, pesticide applicators, the environment, and the economic interests of farmers.

Keywords

Entomopathogenic Fungus Hazard Quotient Laboratory Bioassay Plant Protection Product Beauveria Bassiana 
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. Akey, D.H. & Henneberry, T.J. 2000. Effect on beneficial arthropods of biorationals (insect growth regulators and entomopathogenic fungi) used for control of silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia argentifolii, in upland cotton in Arizona. In, Silverleaf Whitefly. 2000 Supplement to the Five-Year National Research and Action Plan: Progress Review, Technology Transfer, and New Research and Action Plan (1997–2001). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 20002.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, B.V., Pye, B.J., Carrieck, N.L., Moore, D., & Bateman, R. P. 1995. Laboratory testing of a mycopesticide on non-target organisms: the effects of an oil formulation of Metarhizium flavoviride applied to Apis mellifera. Biocontrol Science and Technology 4, 289–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrett, K.L., Grandy, N., Harrison, E.G., Hassan, S.A. & Oomen, P.A. (eds), 1994. SETAC/ESCORT Guidance document on regulatory testing procedures for pesticides with non-target arthropods. Waldon UK: Aimprint Saffron. 51 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Butt, T.M. & Goettel, M.S. 2000. Bioassays of entomogenous fungi. In A. Navon, & K. R. S. Ascher (eds), Bioassays of Entomopathogenic Microbes and Nematodes (pp 141–195 ). Wallingford, U.K.: CABI International Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chase, A.R, L.R. Osborne, and V.M. Ferguson. 1986. Selective isolation of the entomopathogenic fungi Beauveria bassiana and Metarhizium anisopliae from an artificial potting medium. Florida. Entomologist, 69, 285–292.Google Scholar
  6. Cook, R. J., Brnckart, W. L., Coulson, J. R., Goettel, M. S., Humber, R. A., Lumsden, R. D., Maddox, J. V., McManus, M. L., Moore, L., Meyer, S. F., Quimby, P. C., Stack, J. P., & Vaughn, J. L. 1996. Safety of microorganisms intended for pest control and plant disease control: A framework for scientific evaluation. Biological Control, 7, 333–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Copping, L.G. (eds) 2001. The Biopesticide Manual,(2°i ed). Farnham UK: British Crop Protection Council. Council Directive 97/57/EC of 22 September 1997 establishing Annex VI to Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. Official Journal L 265, 27/09/1997 p. 0087–0109.Google Scholar
  8. Council Directive 2001/36/EC of 16 May 2001 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (Text with EEA relevance). Official Journal L 164, 20/06/2001 P. 0001–0038.Google Scholar
  9. Danfa, A., & Van Der Valk, H.C.H.G. 1999. Laboratory testing of Metarhizium spp. & Beauveria bassiana on Sahelian non-target arthropods. Biocontrol Science and Technology 9, 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dent, D. 1999. Policies and regulation on importation and registration of biocontrol agents in other countries. In `Towards implementation of biological control against desert locust: proceedings of the regional workshop on biological control: Cairo, Egypt, 27–29 April 1999. Ed., T. Abate and C. Cairo, Egypt: Pantenius, publ. FAO. pp. 68–73.Google Scholar
  11. Dunkel, F.A. & Jaronski, S. T. 2002. Development of a bioassay system for the predator, Xylocoris flavipes (Reuter) [Hemiptera: Anthocoridae] and its use in subchronic toxicity/pathogenicity studies of Beauveria bassiana (Bals.) Vuill. Strain GHA. Journal of Economic Entomology,(In press).Google Scholar
  12. FAO 1988. Guidelines on the registration of biological pest control agents. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  13. FAO 1996. Code of Conduct for the Import and Release of Exotic Biological Control Agents, International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures, Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Publication No. 3., Rome: FAO. 21 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Fargues, J., Goettel, M.S., Smits, N., Ouedraogo, A., & Rougier, M. 1997. Effect of temperature on vegetative growth of Beauveria bassiana isolates from different origins. Mycologia, 89, 383–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fogg, E.K., B.C. Murphy, C.L. Alexander, M.P. Parrella, & D. Giraud. 1998. The Integration of parasitoids and fungi for control of Aphis gossypii (Homoptera: Aphididae). Innovation in Biological Control Research. California Conference on Biological Control, (pp. 170–173 ). Berkeley CA: University of California.Google Scholar
  16. Fransen, J. J. & J. C. vanLenteren. 1994. Host selection and survival of the parasitoid Encarsia fornwsa on greenhouse whitefly, Trialeuroides vaporarium, in the presence of hosts infected with the fungus Aschersonia aleyrodis. Entomologica Experimentalis et applicata, 69, 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goettel, M.S. 1994. Host range and specificity in relation to safety of exotic fungi. In: Proceedings VIII! International Colloquium on Invertebrate Pathology and Microbial Control, Montpellier, France, pp. 325–329.Google Scholar
  18. Goettel, M.S. 1995. The utility of bioassays in the risk assessment of entomopathogenic fungi. In Biotechnology Risk Assessment: USEPA/USDA, Environment Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Proceedings of the Biotechnology Risk Assessment Symposium, June 6–8, 1995, Pensacola, Florida. (pp. 2–7 ). College Park MD: University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute.Google Scholar
  19. Goettel,. M. S. & Hajek, A.E. 2000. Evaluation of nontarget efects of pathogens used for management of arthropods pp. 81–97 In: E. Wajnberg, J. K. Scott, & P. C. Quimby (eds), Evaluating Indirect Ecological Effects of Biological Control. Wallingford UK: CABI Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goettel, M.S., Poprawski, T.J., Vandenberg, J.D., Li, Z. & Roberts, W.D. 1990. Safety to Nontarget Invertebrates of Fungal Biocontrol Agents. In: Laird, M., Lacey, L.A., & Davidson, E.W. (eds) Safety of Microbial Insecticides. (pp. 209–232 ). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hajek, A.E. & Butler, L. 2000. Predicting the host range of entomopathogenic fungi. In P. A. Follett, & J. J. Duan (eds) Nontarget Effects of Biological Control. (pp. 263–276 ). Dordrecht NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hajek, A.E. & Goettel, M.S. 2000. Guidelines for evaluating effects of entomopathogens on nontarget organisms. In L. A. Lacey and H. K. Kaya (eds) Manual of Field Techniques in Insect Pathology. (pp. 847 to 868 ). Dordrecht NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. Headrick, D. H., Bellows, T. S., & Perring, T. M. 1999. Development and reproduction of a population of Eretmocerus eremicus (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) on Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Environmental-Entomology 28(2), 300–306.Google Scholar
  24. Heinrich, B. & Esch, H. 1994. Thermoregulation in bees. American Scientist. 82, 163–170.Google Scholar
  25. Inglis, G.D., Johnson, D.L., & Goettel, M.S. 1997. Effects of temperature and sunlight on mycosis (Beauveria bassiana) (Hyphomycetes: Sympodulosporae) of grasshoppers under field conditions. Environmental Entomology 26, 400–409.Google Scholar
  26. Jaronski, S.T., Lord, J., Rosinska, J., Bradley, C., Hoelmer, K., Simmons, G., Osterlind, R., Brown, C., Staten, R. & Antilla, L. 1998. Effect of a Beauveria bassiana-based mycoinsecticide on beneficial insects under field conditions. The 1998 Brighton Conference–Pests and Disease, 3, 651–656.Google Scholar
  27. Keller, S. 1998. Use of Fungi for pest control in sustainable agriculture. Phytoprotection 79 (Supp): 56–60.Google Scholar
  28. Lacey, L.A. & Siegel, J.P. 2000. Safety and ecotoxicology of entomopathogenic bacteria. In J.-F. Charles, A. Delecluse and C. Nielsen-Le Roux (eds) Entomopathogenic Bacteria: from Laboratory to Field Application. (pp. 253–273 ). Dordrecht NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Maddox, J.V., McManus, M.L., Jeffords, M.R. & Webb, R.E. 1992. Exotic insect pathogens as classical biological control agents with an emphasis on regulatory considerations. In W.C. Kauffman and J. E. Nechols (eds), Selection Criteria and Ecological Consequences of Importing Natural Enemies, Proceedings, Thomas Say Publications in Entomology,(pp. 27–39). Entomological Society of America.Google Scholar
  30. Murphy, B., von Damm-Kattari, D., & Parella, M. 1999. Interaction between fungal pathogens and natural enemies: implication for combined biocontrol of greenhouse pests. Integrated Control in Glasshouses. IOBC Bulletin, 22 (1), 181–184.Google Scholar
  31. NAFTA 1998. Harmonization of data requirements for microbials, NAFTA Technical Working Group on Pesticides, Project Sheet, June 16, 1998.Google Scholar
  32. NAFTA 1999. Joint review of a microbial pesticide, NAFTA Technical Working Group on Pesticides, Project Sheet R9904FE, February, 1999.Google Scholar
  33. Noma, T. & Strickler, K. 1999. Factors affected Beauveria bassiana for control of Lygus Bug (Heteroptera: Miridae) in alfalfa seed fields. Journal of Agricultural and Urban Entomology 16(4), 215–233.Google Scholar
  34. Noma, T., & Strickler, K. 2000. Effects of Beauveria bassiana on Lygus hesperus (Hemiptera:Miridae) feeding and oviposition. Environmental Entomology 29(2), 394–402.Google Scholar
  35. OECD 1996. Data requirements for registration of biopesticides in OECD member countries: Survey results. OECD Environment Monograph No. 106, Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 121 pp.Google Scholar
  36. OECD 1999. OECD Pesticide Projects, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Report OECD 99–02.Google Scholar
  37. Peveling, R., & Weyrich, J. 1992. Effects of neem oil, Beauveria bassiana and dieldrin on non-target tenebrionid beetles in the desert zone of the Republic of Niger. In: Lomer, C.J., & Prior, C. (eds) Biological Control of Locusts and Grasshoppers. (pp. 321–336 ). Wallingford UK, CAB International.Google Scholar
  38. Peveling, R., Weyrich, J., & Muller, P. 1994. Side-effects of botanicals, insect growth regulators and entomopathogenic fungi on epigeal non-target arthropods in insect control. In, Krall, S. & Wilps, H. (eds) New Trends in Locust Control. Scriftenreihe der GTZ no. 245, (pp. 147–176 ). Eschborn, Germany: GTZ.Google Scholar
  39. Powell, D. A. & Bellows, T. S. 1992. Development and reproduction of two populations of Eretmocerus species (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) on Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Environmental Entomology 21(3), 651–658.Google Scholar
  40. Saik, J. E., Lacey, L.A., & Lacey, C.M. 1990. Safety of microbial insecticides to vertebrates-domestic animals and wildlife. In M. Laird, L.A. Lacey, & E.W. Davidson (eds), Safety of Microbial Insecticides (pp. 115–134 ). Boca Raton FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  41. Siegel, J. P. 1997. Testing the pathogenicity and infectivity of entomopathogens to mammals. In L.A. Lacey (ed), Manual of Techniques in Insect Pathology (pp. 325–336 ). London: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Siegel, J. P. & Shadduck, J.A. 1990. Safety of Microbial Insecticides to Vertebrates — Humans. In: M. Laird, L. A. Lacey and E. W. Davidson (eds), Safety of Microbial Insecticides (pp. 101–113 ). Boca Raton FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  43. Stolz, I. 1999. The effect of Metarhizium anisopliae (Metsch.) Sorokin (=flavoviride) Gams and Rozsypal var. acridum (Deuteromycotina: Hyphomycetes) on non-target Hymenoptera. Ph.D. dissertation, Philosophisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultat der Unversitat Basel, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  44. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1989. Pesticide Testing Guidelines Subdivision M of the: Microbial and Biochemical Pest Control Agents, H-7501C, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  45. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. OPPTS Harmonized Test Guidelines. Series 885 Microbial Pesticide Test Guidelines - Final Guideline. http://www.epa.gov/docs/OPPTS_Harmonized/ 885_ Microbial _Pesticide_Test_Guidelines/Series/ (downloaded February 12, 2002.)Google Scholar
  46. U. S. Government. 2001. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40, Protection of Environment, Parts 150–189.Google Scholar
  47. Washington DC: Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration Vandenberg, J. D. (1990). Safety of four entomopathogens for caged adult honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 83, 756–759.Google Scholar
  48. Wehling, A., Heimbach, U., Coulson, M. J..M., Römbke, J., Schmitzer, S., & Wilhelmy, H. 1998. Method for testing effects of plant protection agents on spiders of the Genus Pardosa (Araneae, Lycosidae) in the laboratory. IOBC Bulletin 21 (6), 109–117.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan T. Jaronski
  • Mark S. Goettel
  • Chris J. Lomer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations