ArticleEnvironmental toxicology and chemistry2020
Toxicity in Neonicotinoids to Folsima candida and Eisenia andrei.
Article in Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Changes in soil microbial communities after exposure to neonicotinoids: A systematic review.Environmental microbiology reports · 2023Pooled it
- Collembola are Among the Most Pesticide-Sensitive Soil Fauna Groups: A Meta-Analysis.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2022Pooled it
- Pesticide effects on the abundance of springtails and mites in field mesocosms at an agricultural site.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2022Article
- Long-Term Effects of Imidacloprid, Thiacloprid, and Clothianidin on the Growth and Development of Eisenia andrei.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We compared the toxicity of the neonicotinoids imidacloprid, thiacloprid, thiamethoxam, acetamiprid, and clothianidin in terms of the survival and reproduction of 2 species of soil invertebrates, Folsomia candida and Eisenia andrei. Tests were performed using LUFA 2.2 natural soil, following standard protocols aimed at answering 2 questions: 1) Is there a difference in the toxicity between pure compound and its formulation? and 2) Is there a difference in the sensitivity of the species exposed to the same compound? For E. andrei, formulations and pure compounds had similar toxicity to both endpoints tested. For F. candida, acetamiprid and imidacloprid had different toxicities, with acetamiprid being 4 times more toxic to survival (median lethal concentration [LC50] 0.12 mg active substance [a.s.]/kg dry soil) and imidacloprid being 4 times more toxic to reproduction of the springtail (median effect concentration [EC50] 0.25 mg a.s./kg dry soil) than their commercial formulations. The most toxic compound to E. andrei was acetamiprid (LC50 0.80 and EC50 0.35-0.40 mg a.s./kg), and the most toxic to F. candida was clothianidin (LC50 0.07 and EC50 0.05 mg a.s./kg). Estimated risk ratios indicated that only one application/yr of clothianidin in the formulation Poncho® may pose a threat to the populations of springtails and earthworms. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:548-555. © 2019 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.