2001
DOI: 10.1007/s003740100364
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of methods to derive pesticide degradation parameters for regulatory modelling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
69
0
5

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 127 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
1
69
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Since the determination coefficient R 2 has a limited value when comparing the fits of two models with different numbers of parameters, the chi-square (χ 2 ) error value test recommended by the FOCUS degradation kinetics guidance was used for model comparison (FOCUS, 2006). Only for soil 1, the two-compartment model resulted in smaller χ 2 minimum error value (at which the test is passed at the 5% significance level) than the single first-order model for both enantiomers (Table 3) The superior fitting of metalaxyl dissipation data to the two-compartment model for the clay soil (soil 1) suggests that a fraction of the added pesticide in this soil could have displayed reduced bioavailability, thus dissipating at a relatively slower degradation rate, than the more available fraction typically present in the accessible soil solution phase (Beulke and Brown, 2001). This behavior would also explain the reduced enantioselectivity of metalaxyl degradation in soil 1, because the protected, less bioavailable fraction is expected to be more racemic than the fraction readily available to enantioselective biodegradation, since it is supposed to have undergone less microbial attack (Ulrich et al, 2009;Wong et al, 2012).…”
Section: Accordingly Ef Values Ef= [S]/([s]+[r])mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the determination coefficient R 2 has a limited value when comparing the fits of two models with different numbers of parameters, the chi-square (χ 2 ) error value test recommended by the FOCUS degradation kinetics guidance was used for model comparison (FOCUS, 2006). Only for soil 1, the two-compartment model resulted in smaller χ 2 minimum error value (at which the test is passed at the 5% significance level) than the single first-order model for both enantiomers (Table 3) The superior fitting of metalaxyl dissipation data to the two-compartment model for the clay soil (soil 1) suggests that a fraction of the added pesticide in this soil could have displayed reduced bioavailability, thus dissipating at a relatively slower degradation rate, than the more available fraction typically present in the accessible soil solution phase (Beulke and Brown, 2001). This behavior would also explain the reduced enantioselectivity of metalaxyl degradation in soil 1, because the protected, less bioavailable fraction is expected to be more racemic than the fraction readily available to enantioselective biodegradation, since it is supposed to have undergone less microbial attack (Ulrich et al, 2009;Wong et al, 2012).…”
Section: Accordingly Ef Values Ef= [S]/([s]+[r])mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first-order model however, commonly underestimates the initial rate and over-estimates the final rate 7 . This failure has been accounted for by assuming two first-order processes which appear to fit the data but have no theoretical basis 8,9 . Several hypotheses to explain these phenomena have been offered and included: reaction kinetics of an order higher than one; processes in addition to decomposition affecting the catabolism of the pesticide; sorption processes influencing the availability of the substrate for decomposition; the heterogeneity or spatial variability of the soils; the multiphase solution of herbicide formulation.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Typically, a fast initial degradation is followed by a gradual decrease in the degradation rate and eventually a very slow degradation. The gradual change in degradation rate may be better described by using two rate constants instead of one (Beulke & Brown, 2001;Henriksen et al, 2004;Ma et al, 2004;Sanchez et al, 2003 The fast degradation in the first compartment occurs when the pesticide is in the soil-water phase and readily available for microorganisms. In the second compartment the pesticide is sorbed to soil particles.…”
Section: Degradation Processesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These characteristics suggest that a single DT 50 may not be sufficient as an index of persistence. Beulke & Brown (2001) recomended using DT 90 as a risk index to indicate the persistence, where the DT 90 represents the time for 90% of the initial residues to dissipate; whereas Grover et al (1997) and Wolt (1997) used both DT 50 and DT 90 as indices of persistence.…”
Section: Degradation Processesmentioning
confidence: 99%