|
|
New lab methods for speed testing of fumigant emissions |
|
A simpler, quicker way to track pesticide emissions from
agricultural fields has been devised by the United States
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists. Using low-cost
laboratory tests and mathematical models, research leader Dr.
Scott Yates and colleagues at the United States Salinity
Laboratory in California are able to evaluate – and even
predict – fumigant emissions.
Each potential methyl bromide replacement will require its own
set of regulations, based on findings from complex field
studies that may number as many as 60. Such studies can take
up to a year to complete and very expensive, besides exposing
researchers to toxic chemicals. Dr. Yates’ team has shown that
lab tests can yield some of the same results as those
painstakingly obtained from outdoor field studies. To collect
their data, the ARS scientists designed elaborate soil columns
and soil cell equipment with which to observe pesticide
movement through soil. They combine data collected this way
with numerous mathematically driven models. Dr. Yates admits
that field studies will always be needed to tie lab-based
findings to the real-world agricultural landscapes.
Source:
www.ars.usda.gov |
|
|
|
|
New fumigant to secure grains |
|
In Australia, a partnership between CSIRO and the Grains
Research & Development Corporation (GRDC) is setting up
alternatives to phosphine fumigation and chemicals facing
environmental phase-outs. Phosphine has been the mainstay of
insect control in stored grain and an important factor in
Australia’s reputation for clean grain in export markets.
However, in Australia pressure has been on to find a new
fumigant, as increasing numbers of insects show signs of
phosphine resistance. Most alternatives have been discarded
because of environmental issues, such as residues or
ozone-depleting characteristics.
Over the past 10-15 years, CSIRO Entomology Department has
carried out several successful GRDC projects investigating
fumigant alternatives. So far, the most promising has been
GLO2, which contains 95 per cent ethyl formate and five per
cent isothiocyanide, both of which are naturally occurring
chemicals. GLO2 has been formulated as a liquid fumigant for
directly spraying onto grains. It will vaporize in situ, but
can also be vaporized prior to use if required. “A big
advantage is that it is quick – GLO2 takes less than a day to
fumigate and there is no withholding period,” the researchers
say. It can be used to fumigate bulk stores, replacing methyl
bromide, and for structural and equipment fumigation,
replacing dichlorvos. It could also be used as part of a
phosphine-resistance management strategy.
Although laboratory tests, on-farm trials and 50-tonne silo
trials have already proven the product’s ability, the team
must now focus on providing data to support an application for
product registration.
CSIRO is undertaking regionally based storage trials with all
grain types to understand GLO2’s toxicology, so that label
rates, environmental effects, efficacy and health and safety
issues can be determined. GLO2’s advantages include:
- Shows a high level of efficacy in eradicating major
grain pests at all life stages;
- Acts quickly and leaves virtually no residue;
- Does not affect grain quality;
- Breaks down to compounds that occur naturally in grains;
- Is a liquid that is safe and simple to use in comparison
to other fumigants and pesticides;
- Has component compounds that are already in use as
fumigants and food additives; and
- Does not affect the ozone layer or contribute to
greenhouse gases.
Source:
www.grdc.com.au |
|
|