Using a geographic information system to identify areas with potential for off-target pesticide exposure

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 2250-2259

  Pfleeger, Thomas G ^a   Olszyk, David ^a   Burdick, Connie A ^a   King, George ^b   Kern, Jeffrey ^b   Fletcher, John ^c  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b Dynamac   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

Author keywords

Ecological risk assessment; Geographic Information System; Plant test species; Plant toxicology

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; HEALTH CARE; PESTICIDE EFFECTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY;

ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT; PLANT TEST SPECIES; PLANT TOXICOLOGY;

GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

HERBICIDE; PESTICIDE;

CROP; FIELD; GIS; HEALTH RISK; HERBICIDE; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICOLOGY;

AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT; ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVOLUTIONARY ADAPTATION; EXPOSURE VARIABLE; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; PESTICIDES;

CALIFORNIA; CALIFORNIA VALLEY; GREAT LAKES; IDAHO; MISSISSIPPI VALLEY; NORTH AMERICA; OREGON; UNITED STATES; WASHINGTON [UNITED STATES]; WILLAMETTE VALLEY;

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 33751027214     PISSN: 07307268     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1897/05-281R.1     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Fletcher JS, Johnson FL, McFarlane JC. 1990. Influence of greenhouse versus field testing and taxonomic differences on plant sensitivity to chemical treatment. Environ Toxicol Chem 9:769-776.
2. Olszyk DM, Burdick CA, Pfleeger TG, Lee EH, Watrud LS. 2004. Assessing the risks to nontarget terrestrial plants from herbicides. Japanese Journal of Agricultural Meteorology 60:221-242.
3. Boutin C, Rogers CA. 2000. Pattern of sensitivity of plant species to various herbicides-An analysis with two databases. Ecotoxicology 9:255-271.
4. Maxwell B, Weed R. 2001. Nontarget terrestrial plant effects of low-dose, high-potency herbicides. In Ferrenc S, ed, Impacts of Low-Dose, High-Potency Herbicides on Nontarget and Unintended Plant Species. SETAC, Pensacola, FL, USA, pp 85-97.
5. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, Scientific Advisory Panel. 2001. Review of nontarget plant toxicity tests under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), June 27-29, 2001. Final Report. SAP Report 2001-08. Washington, DC.
6. Clark J, Ortego L, Fairbrother A. 2004. Sources of variability in plant toxicity testing. Chemosphere 57:1599-1612.
7. Fletcher JS. 1991. Horse Heaven Hills/Badger Canyon: A case study of alleged pesticide drift damage. Proceedings, Air and Waste Management Association, Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 16-21, pp 17.
8. Posthuma L, Suter GW II, Traas TP, eds. 2002. Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
9. Warren-Hicks WJ, Moore DRJ, eds. 1998. Uncertainty Analysis in Ecological Risk Assessment. SETAC, Pensacola, FL, USA.
10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002E Washington, DC.
11. National Agricultural Statistics Service. 1999. 1997 Census of Agriculture, Geographic Area Series, 3 CD-ROM set. U.S. Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, DC.
12. Vogelmann J, Sohl T, Howard S. 1998. Regional characterization of land cover using multiple sources of data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 64:45-57.
13. Vogelmann JE, Sohl TL, Campbell PV, Shaw DM. 1998. Regional land cover characterization using Landsat thematic mapper data and ancillary data sources. Environ Monit Assess 51:415-428.
14. Thelin GP, Gianessi LP. 2000. Method for estimating pesticide use for county areas of the conterminous United States. USGS Open File Report 00-250. U.S. Geological Survey, Sacramento, CA.
15. Ferguson S, McKay SJ, Nagel DE, Piepho T, Rorig ML, Anderson C, Kellogg L. 2003. Assessing values of air quality and visibility at risk from wildland fires. Research Paper PNW-RP-550. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR.
16. National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2003. Agricultural chemical usage: 2002 field crops summary. Ag Ch 1 (03). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
17. Herbicide Handbook Committee. 2002. Herbicide Handbook of the Weed Science Society of America, 8th ed. Weed Science Society of America, Lawrence, KS, USA.
18. Teske ME, Bird SL, Esterly DM, Curbishley TB, Ray SL, Perry SG. 2000. AgDRIFT™: A model for estimating near-field spray drift from aerial applications. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:659-671.
19. Lee HE, Burdick CA, Olszyk DM. 2005. GIS-based risk assessment of pesticide drift: Fresno County, California. EPA/600/R-05/029. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, OR.
20. Norton SB, Rodier DJ, Gentile JH, van der Schalie WH, Wood WP, Slimak MW. 1992. A framework for ecological risk assessment at the EPA. Environ Toxicol Chem 11:1663-1672.
21. Tingey DT, Hogsett WE, Henderson S. 1990. Definition of adverse effects for the purpose of establishing secondary national ambient air quality standards. J Environ Qual 19:635-639.
22. Holst RW. 1991. Pesticides phytotoxicity testing a historical perspective. Proceedings, Plant Tier Testing: A Workshop to Evaluate Nontarget Plant Testing in Subdivision J Pesticide Guidelines, Corvallis, OR, USA, November 29-December 1, 1990, pp 2-5.