SUBSTANTION OF THE NEED FOR MONITORING IN ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTS OF INSECTICIDES FROM THE CLASS OF TETRAMIC AND TETRONIC ACID DERIVATIVES TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THEIR SPECIFIC INFLUENCE ON THE HUMAN ORGANISM.

OBJECTIVE: The aim: Substantiation of the need for monitoring in environmental objects of spiromesifen, spirodiclofen and spirotetramat, taking into account their specific impact on the human organism to reduce the risk of their negative influence on public health and the environment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: The subject was insecticides, the class of tetramic and tetronic acids derivatives, spiromesifen, spirodiclofen and spirotetramate. Physico-chemical, toxicological and hygienic evaluation of the results was performed according to the literature data. Selection criteria were used to substantiate the needs in monitoring of these insecticides. RESULTS: Results: Spiromesifen, spirodiclofen and spirotetramate according to the Hygienic classification of pesticides by the limiting criterion of hazard belong to 1 class (strong allergen), 2 (carcinogen) and 3 classes (inhalation toxicity), respectively. The value of ADD (allowable daily dose) for human of spiromesifen, approved in Europe is 0.03 mg•kg-1. According to the assessment of hazards for professional contingents and the coefficient of possible inhalation poisoning (CPIP) and the coefficient of selective action (CSA), spiromesifen may pose a risk. We can conclude about the safety of the compound according to GUS, SCI-GROW, LEACH indices, and hence the absence of risk of potential entry of the substance into the human body with contaminated water or food. According to persistence in the environment, these insecticides are law and moderately persistent. Direct effect on the thyroid gland is absent. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: Monitoring of spiromesifen and spirotetramate in water, soil and agricultural raw materials is not obligatory, and for spirodiclofen is desirable.

COMPARATIVE HYGIENIC ASSESSMENT OF WORKING CONDITIONS AND OCCUPATIONAL RISK IN THE APPLICATION OF PESTICIDES (ON THE EXAMPLE OF FUNGICIDE AMISTAR EXTRA 280, SC) USING DIFFERENT TYPES OF SPRAYERS.

OBJECTIVE: The aim: Was a comparative hygienic assessment of working conditions and occupational risk in the application of fungicide Amistar Extra 280, SC using slotted and injector sprayers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: Sprayers Super Poly 110-04 (variant №1) and Guardian Air GA110-04 (variant № 2), and certified equipment were used. The occupational risk was assessed in accordance with the methodological recommendations proposed by the L.I. Medvedia Scientific Center for Preventive Toxicology, Food and Chemical Safety specialists. RESULTS: Results: When using the slotted sprayer Super Poly 110-04 in the air of the working zone of the tractor driver the content of azoxystrobin was 0.0015 ± 0.0001 mg/m3, cyproconazole - 0.085 ± 0.002 mg/m3, at a distance of 10 m from the edge of the field on the leeward side - 0.003 ± 0.001 and 0.11 ± 0.02 mg/m3, respectively. Visual analysis of water-sensitive cards after using slotted sprayers showed the presence of single drops of pesticide working solution in the wear zone. When applying the pesticide using a Guardian Air GA110-04 injector sprayer in the air of the working zone of the tractor driver, areas of possible wear (10 and 100 m), theconcentration of the active substances of Amistar Extra 280, SC formulation was below the limit of quantification of the method. When assessing the complex risk for tractor drivers, a statistically significant difference was found for azoxystrobin (p = 0.002) and cyproconazole (p = 0.001) when using a slotted sprayer Super Poly 110-04 and injector Guardian Air GA110-04. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: Values of the combined complex risk of application of the Amistar Extra 280, SC formulation for tractor drivers of variant №2 application were significantly lower than those for tractor drivers of variant №1.