Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant protection products and their Resi-dues on a request from the Commission on the risks associated with an in-crease of the MRL for dieldrin on courgettes

Abstract

SUMMARYFollowing a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the risks associated with an increase of the MRL for dieldrin on courgettes.Dieldrin was developed in the 1940s and was widely used as an insecticide up to the early 1970s. However, its use was stopped when it became clear that it has very unfavourable environmental and toxicological characteristics. Today, dieldrin is therefore banned in most countries of the world. Moreover, it is on the list of the Stockholm Convention to protect human health and the environment from persistent organic pollutants.Dieldrin is very persistent in the environment and has a strong potential to accumulate in the food chain. Due to the very slow environmental degradation of the substance, dieldrin is still a widespread soil contaminant in Europe and other places. When growing courgettes on such soils, residues can be taken up by the plants and transported to the fruits. Monitoring data from The Netherlands show that courgettes grown in greenhouses from the western part of the country do not always comply with the existing MRL of 0.02 mg/kg. The Netherlands has therefore requested an increase of this MRL-value to 0.05 mg/kg and the European Commission has asked EFSA to evaluate the toxicological implications of the proposed new MRL-value.The main reasons for prohibiting the active substance were its environmental persistence and its tendency to accumulate in animal tissues. It is therefore appropriate to ask whether exposure as a result of eating courgettes with an increased MRL, together with other known sources of exposure (e.g. through animal products), represents a potential risk for European consumers in the long as well as in the short term.The residue definition for dieldrin under current EU residue guidelines specifies dieldrin "singly or combined with aldrin, expressed as dieldrin". This definition reflects the close chemical and toxicological relationship between these two cyclodiene insecticides. There are two isomers of dieldrin, the exo-and the endo-form. Dieldrin itself is the exo-isomer. The PPR Panel 2 briefly reviewed the characteristics of the different isomeric forms of dieldrin and concluded that focus should be on the exo-form of the substance, i.e. dieldrin itself. The Panel agreed not to include photodieldrin -an environmental product of dieldrin -in further consideration because this substance is not included in the residue definition. Furthermore photodieldrin has not been studied in such detail and the literature and data on the occurrence and fate of its residue are scarce.The Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) for dieldrin in 1967, confirmed this in 1977 and converted (but not re-evaluated) it to a PTDI (Provisional Tolerable Daily Intake) in 1994. JMPR has not derived an acute reference dose (ARfD) for dieldrin. The propensity of dieldrin to accumulate in biological organisms...

Organohalogenated Substances and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Fish from Mediterranean Sea and North Italian Lakes: Related Risk for the Italian Consumers

“…The provisional tolerable daily intake (PTDI) of aldrin, expressed as a sum of dieldrin and aldrin, is 100 ng kg −1 b.w. per day, based on hepatic tumours in mice [ 43 ]. The calculated EDI is 0.0091 ng kg −1 b.w.…”

Retrospective cumulative dietary risk assessment of craniofacial alterations by residues of pesticides

“… DAR (2006) and Addendum (2010), EFSA Conclusion (2010) Delta 8,9 isomer of avermectin B1a (metabolite of abamectin) folpet Facial fissures: cleft palate 1.5 3 ■■■■■ (1996b), Developmental toxicity, CD1 mouse, oral gavage 0, 0.75, 1.5, 3.0 days 6–15 p.c. DAR (2005) (abamectin) and Addendum (2016), EFSA Conclusion (2016) Deltamethrin Skull vault agenesis: exencephaly 4 16 ■■■■■ (1977c), Developmental toxicity, New Zealand White rabbit, oral gavage 0, 1, 4, 16 days 6–19 p.c DAR (1998), Addendum (2002), (DRAR 2018), EC Review report (2002) No indicators 32 (10) – ■■■■■ (2001), Developmental toxicity, New Zealand White rabbit oral gavage 0, 3, 10 , 32 days 6–28 p.c DAR (1998), Addendum (2002), (DRAR 2018), EC Review report (2002) Dieldrin Facial fissures: cleft palate < 15 15 ■■■■■ (1974), Developmental toxicity, CD1 mouse, oral gavage (b) 0, 15 single oral dose on day 9 JMPR (1994), EFSA PPR Panel ( 2007 ); JMPR (1989) No indicators 6 (6) – ■■■■■ (1975), Developmental toxicity CD1 mouse, oral gavage (b) 0, 1.5, 3, 6 days 7–16 p.c. JMPR (1...…”