Relevance. Evaluation of occupational risk in the application of various groups and classes of pesticides is an actual problem, since it is known that chemical plant protection products can cause both acute poisoning and long-term effects of the action, including neurotoxic effects if the application rules are not followed. Objective of the work was a hygienic assessment of the working conditions and occupational risk of workers when using pesticides Ampligo 150 ZC, Banjo Forte, SC, Blockbuster, CE, Zero, CE, Cloti-200, SC, Mistral Top, SC, Mistral, WG, Paritet, SC, Remontal, WG, Stomp Aqua, SC, T-2, SC, Fronda, SC on potatoes to substantiate the regulations for their safe application. Materials and methods. The occupational risk assessment was carried out in accordance with the methodological recommendations proposed by the specialists of the L.I. Medvedia Scientific Center for Preventive Toxicology, Food and Chemical Safety. Statistical processing of the results was performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics Base v.22 and MS Excel software licensed statistical package (version 12.0.6425.1000, 2007). Results. It has been established that in real conditions of potatoes treatment with Ampligo 150 ZC, Banjo Forte, SC, Blockbuster, CE, Zero, CE, Cloti-200, SC, Mistral Top, SC, Mistral, WG, Paritet, SC, Remontal, WG, Stomp Aqua, SC, T-2, SC, Fronda, SC, while observing the recommended agrotechnical and hygienic regulations for safe application, there is no excess of hygienic standards in the working area air and it is proved that the Hygienic regulations of studied formulations safe application have been substantiated. Conclusion. A statistical analysis of the results showed that the magnitude of inhalation risk was significantly higher for tractor drivers than for refuellers (p<0.05). The value of the combined complex risk of the studied formulations application for refuellers was significantly lower than that for the tractor drivers.

In the structure of regional and planetary pollutants, pesticides are in the top ten, and among food contaminants along with heavy metals – they occupy first place in the world. It is known that pesticides and agrochemicals, which belong to the group of biologically active compounds, are one of the important factors affecting the human body. The aim: comparative hygienic assessment of working conditions and occupational risk when using pesticides by different methods of application (knapsack, rod, ventilator, unmanned and aviation) on the example of the fungicide Amistar Extra 280 SC. Materials and methods. Field studies were conducted in 2018–2021. When applying the formulation knapsack sprayer SOLO-10, trailed boom sprayer AMAZON 1201 UF combined with a tractor MTZ 82.1 Belarus, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for spraying fields Agras T16, AN-2 aircraft combined with OZh-2 were used. Results. As a result of field researches of working conditions of employees during the performance of production operations on the pesticides application, it was found that in the air treatment areas and in areas of possible drift the levels of studied active ingredients were below the limit of quantification of the method. The difference between azoxystrobin (0,04±0,003) and cyproconazole (12,4±0,5) for the tank refueler and the UAV external pilot in the field studies is significant according to Student's criterion (p >0,05). For the operator who applied the pesticide with a knapsack sprayer, the values of inhalation risks were significantly higher than for the tankers of the sprayer tank at p >0,05. The values of the combined risk when using a fan sprayer (0,46±0,02) significantly exceeded the data obtained when using a rod sprayer (0,14±0,006) Conclusions. Analysis of the obtained results showed that the values of the combined risk are significantly higher for the operator / tractor driver, signalman than for their refuelers (at p <0,05). The values of the combined risk of the external pilot were significantly lower than those of the tanker when using a pesticide using a UAV.

Relevance. More and more widespread use in the world, and in Ukraine in particular, is acquiring a method of applying pesticides from the air using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs, or drones). It is expected that in the global agricultural market in the period from 2018 to 2026 the growth rate of drone use will be up to +18.5%. Objective: hygienic assessment of working conditions and occupational risks when applying pesticides using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), analysis of their features and comparison with other most common types of treatment in agriculture. Materials and methods. Field studies were carried out in 2018–2021. When introducing the drug, certified equipment was used: a backpack sprayer SOLO-10, a trailed boom sprayer AMAZON 1201 UF combined with an MTZ 82.1 “Belorus” tractor, an Agras T16 unmanned aerial vehicle for spraying fields produced by DJ company, aircraft AN-2 combined with OZh-2 (with valveless liquid cut-off). Air sampling was performed using a “Typhoon” portable aspirator. Results. Analysis of calculations for the determination of inhalation for azoxystrobin (0.12 ± 0.004) and cyproconazole (54.2 ± 1.23); complex for azoxystrobin (0.52 ± 0.01) and cyproconazole (58.4 ± 1, 8) and combined (0.59 ± 0.01) risks showed that they are the highest for the signalman indicating the direction of flight to the pilot. Reliably lower risks of the negative impact of the working environment on the health of the sprayer tanker than the operator / tractor driver, aircraft pilot and signalman. Note that inhalation, percutaneous, complex and combined risks are reliably higher only for the drone tanker compared to the data for the outdoor pilot when a pesticide is introduced from the air. Conclusion. It was found that the risks for workers involved in the processing of crops by UAVs are significantly lower compared to aviation treatment, and are in the same range with the risks of other types of processing (rod, fan, knapsack).

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. 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: 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), the concentration 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. 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.

The aim: Assessment of the hazard to the population when consuming treated crops by using different technologies. Materials and methods: Unmanned aerial vehicle XAG XPlanet 2020 equipped with four rotating rotors, which allows to keep in the air a 20-liter tank was used for spraying field; a manned aircraft AN-2 aggregated with a serial sprayer. High-clearance rod treatment of sunflower and rapeseed crops was carried out by using a PLA MAP II 2010 tractor. Results: When the herbicide was applied by aerial application with UAV, the initial content of diquat dibromide in treated rapeseed and sunflower plants on the day of treatment was significantly higher than in the soil under crops (р≤0.05). The analysis of the diquat content dynamics in sunflower also showed a similar behavior of the a.i. in the plant after processing by another application methods: UAV, aerial and high-clearance rod treatment. The integral index of hazard when using pesticide-contaminated products (IIHPCPC) = ADD+С+ DT50 = 4+1+1 = 6 points. That is why, diquat dibromide can be classified according to this index can be classified as compound of 3rd hazard class. Conclusions: As a result of the conducted researches, it was established that the content of diquat in rapeseed and sunflower samples grown with the Reglone Air 200 SL application (after treatment and before harvesting) was below the maximum residue levels in those crops. There are no statistically significant differences in the behavior of diquat dibromide when applying by different methods of application (UAV, aerial, high-clearance rod treatment) in different agro-climatic zones of Ukraine.