Ac. Matz et al., EFFECTS OF AZINPHOS-METHYL ON NORTHERN BOBWHITE - A COMPARISON OF LABORATORY AND FIELD RESULTS, Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 17(7), 1998, pp. 1364-1370
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) ecological ris
k assessment process uses laboratory toxicity data in quotient indices
to characterize risks to wildlife, but with poor understanding of the
relationship between these data and actual field effects. To explore
this relationship. we compared toxicity results from a controlled fiel
d study to those from a dietary toxicity (median lethal concentration)
laboratory test. In the field test, northern bobwhite (Colinus virgin
ianus) chicks were cross-fostered to bantam chicken (Gallus domesticus
) hens. Then, 12-d-old broods in enclosed alfalfa fields were exposed
to sprayed azinphos-methyl (Guthion(R) 2S) at three application rates
(0 [control], 0.77, and 3.11 kg active ingredient/ha). Chick survival
was significantly lower at 3.11 kg/ha 0 to 5 d postspray and at both a
pplication rates 6 to 10 d postspray compared to control (p < 0.05). C
hick brain acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity. growth, and weight of
crop contents were significantly reduced in treatments compared to co
ntrol (p < 0.05). In the laboratory test, 12-d-old bobwhite were expos
ed to dietary concentrations of 0 !control), 150, 240, 380, and 600 pp
m azinphos-methyl far 5 d. Survival was significantly lower at 600 ppm
compared to control, and brain AChE activity and growth rates were si
gnificantly reduced from control for all concentrations (p < 0.05. Chi
ck survival, brain AChE activity, and growth in the field were signifi
cantly different from equivalent exposures in the laboratory (p < 0.05
), with equivalency determined by U.S. EPA's vegetation residue estima
tes, and temporal patterns of effects differed between field and labor
atory. We conclude that the effects observed in the field differed fro
m that predicted by risk quotients because the quotient method does no
t consider alternate routes of exposure. behavioral responses, influen
ce of spatial and temporal environmental variability, or indirect effe
cts.