Pesticides and other contaminants that get into the natural
environment can affect wild plants and animals. The science of
studying these effects is called ecotoxicology.1
Ecotoxicology is a mix of ecology, toxicology, physiology, analytical
chemistry, molecular biology, and mathematics. Ecotoxicology looks at
the impacts of contaminants including pesticides on individuals,
populations, natural communities, and ecosystems. Communities of
living things and the environments they live in form
ecosystems. Ecosystems include ponds, rivers, deserts, grasslands, and
forests, and they too can be affected by pesticides. Ecotoxicologists
also study what happens to the pesticides themselves, where they go in
the environment, how long they last, and how they finally break
down. This fact sheet will focus on pesticides in ecotoxicology.
Fate, transport, and exposure
A pesticide may directly affect something far from the site of application.
Pesticides that are bound to soil particles may be carried into streams
with runoff. Pesticide drift may travel many miles in the wind. Sunlight,
water, microbes, and even air can break down pesticides.
Some pesticides last a long time in the environment, and may pose risks
to living things many years after they were last used. Insecticides such as
DDT, chlordane, and dieldrin don't break down easily, and they are still
found in soil, plants, and animals. Persistent pesticides may travel long
distances in the air or water, or even in living organisms such as migrating
birds or fish. Researchers have found pesticide residues in alpine lakes
and snow, many miles from where the pesticides were applied.2,3
Pesticides
have even been found in the Arctic and Antarctic environments,
probably carried there by currents in the atmosphere or oceans.4,5
Plants may absorb pesticides through their roots or leaves. Animals
can be exposed to pesticides directly by breathing them in, getting
the pesticides on their skin, or eating them. Pesticides may fool
animals; granules may look like food to wild birds
especially.6
Unfortunately, this has actually happened and
birds were poisoned as a result.7 Sometimes an animal's
food may be contaminated from pesticide residues in plants or in the
tissues of prey. Secondary poisoning can occur if an animal
eats another animal that has been fatally poisoned by a pesticide, and
predator dies as a result of the poisoned prey. This is also
called relay toxicosis.
Some chemicals cross the skin, lungs or gills, and intestine more
easily than others. When scientists evaluate the uptake and activity
of pesticides in the body, they call it bioavailability. A
pesticide's bioavailability depends on whether it is soluble in fat,
whether it might be stored in other tissue such as bone or the liver,
and how difficult it is for the body to break down the pesticide and
excrete it.1
Pesticide residues build up in organisms and in food
webs. Bioaccumulation can occur if residues
build up
faster
than the organism can break them down and excrete
them. Bioaccumulation in aquatic animals where the pesticide is taken
in from the water is called bioconcentration.1 If a
predator eats many plants and/or animals that have pesticide residues
in their tissues, the predator may suffer from even greater exposure
than the prey. Bald eagles, ospreys and peregrine falcons were brought
to the brink of extinction because their food sources (fish and other
birds) were contaminated with DDE, the breakdown product of the
insecticide DDT. The residues built up with each link in the food
chain until very high concentrations were present in the eagles,
falcons, and ospreys. When residues increase in the food web, the
process is called biomagnification.1 No single
exposure for either the prey or the predator is likely to cause
injury, but the overall effects can be very harmful.
Effects may be specific to time and place
The timing of exposure can greatly affect how much damage a
pesticide might cause. Migrating animals may use a stopover site or
staging area only briefly. At that time, those special locations may
harbor a large proportion of the population or even the entire
species. Other animals form breeding colonies for a few weeks or
months of the year. Examples include some species of bats and
swifts. If a pesticide is used when and where wildlife are clustered
together, much greater harm could result than if that application
occurred at another time even in the same place.
Risks may also increase at certain times in the animals'
lives. Pesticides may pose greater risks to young animals or animals
under stress from migration or breeding. The life stage of a plant may
affect its risk of harm. An herbicide may not hurt a seed, or cause
only small damage to a large, vigorous plant. However, it might kill a
seedling.
Exposure risks may also depend on the conditions in a certain
place. For example, barn owls eat voles when they are
available.8
When voles are scarce, barn owls are more
likely to eat other rodents such as rats and house mice. Rats and
house mice are more likely to carry traces of pesticides. Dead and
dying prey may be easier to catch and eat.9 That means the
risks to barn owls depend on what is happening within the rodent
community, which affects what prey the barn owls are likely to
catch.
Pesticides can affect individual plants and animals in two
ways. First, they may cause injury or death after the plant or animal
is exposed to the pesticide directly. This might happen if the
pesticide drifts onto the plant or animal, the animal breathes in the
pesticide, or if the animal drinks or eats something that is
contaminated. Plant roots may pick up pesticides in the soil. Any
injuries resulting from these exposures are called direct
effects. The second way pesticides may cause harm is by changing
or killing something the plant or animal needs. For example,
pesticides can affect an animal's food supply by killing certain
plants or insects. The loss of plant cover may also remove the
animal's shelter. Plants could be affected if their pollinators or
seed-dispersers are killed. These are indirect
effects.
A pesticide does not have to kill an organism to do harm. Instead,
a pesticide may have sublethal effects such
as
making
the
organism sick, changing its behavior, or changing its ability to
reproduce or survive stress. If enough individuals die without leaving
behind enough offspring to take their places, the population gets
smaller. For example, young salmon exposed to pesticides do not grow
or survive as well as unexposed fish. Over time, this could affect
salmon population numbers.10
Pesticides could affect a
population through direct or indirect, as well as lethal or sublethal
effects.
Effects can also occur on larger ecological scales than that of the
individual. For example, predator-prey relationships may be changed by
pesticides and other contaminants.11 If the predatory wasps
are more affected by an insecticide than the pests they feed on, the
pest population may grow. The population of pests will often recover
faster than the populations of predators following pesticide
applications in agriculture.11
When pesticides remove one of the species at the bottom of a food
web, many other species may be affected. In this example of
community-level effects, spraying for mosquitoes with Bacillus
thuringiensis israelensis (Bti) reduced the populations of midges and
mosquitoes, the favorite food of house martins. House martins in
treated areas made fewer trips back to their nest with food, and
raised fewer young, than house martins living in untreated
areas. Spiders and dragonflies declined in treated areas, probably
because they also eat midges and mosquitos.12
Declines in the number of one species may also affect plants or
other organisms. For example, if a butterfly's host plant is affected
by pesticides, they may not have enough places to lay eggs. If a
pollinator species is lost, plants may not be able to set enough seed
to maintain their numbers. These indirect effects can be very
difficult to predict without doing experiments.
Researchers put together large containers for stream insects
and earthworms, and they added leaves from trees
that were treated with the insecticide imidacloprid. Aquatic
insects and microbes decomposed fewer leaves from the
treated trees, and the earthworms lost weight compared
to controls. Treated leaves were therefore not as quickly
broken down by earthworms as the control leaves were.13
This study demonstrated a sublethal effect on decomposers
by affecting their feeding behavior, which led to indirect
effects on the whole community because of the slower
breakdown of the leaves.
In another study, researchers created ponds made from watering
tanks, placing plants and animals inside that would be found in an
ordinary pond. When they sprayed some of the tanks with the
insecticide malathion, many effects occurred. The number of tiny
aquatic animals called zooplankton declined in the treated
tanks. Zooplankton feed on phytoplankton, tiny floating
plants. Phytoplankton increased when zooplankton densities declined,
and blocked light penetration to the bottom of the tanks. Algae and
other organisms growing on the bottom died from lack of light. Leopard
frog tadpoles had less food, and grew more slowly. This made them more
likely to die as the ponds dried up. An effect that ripples through a
community like this is called a trophic
cascade.14
Another study studied the relationship between parasitic flatworm
infections in leopard frogs and pesticides in water. The concentration
of atrazine, a common herbicide, was directly related to the number of
parasites infecting the leopard frogs. When atrazine was added to the
tanks, it killed the phytoplankton. More sunlight reached the bottoms
of the tanks, allowing periphyton to grow. More snails were able to
live in those tanks. The flatworms use snails as hosts before they
infect the frogs, so more snails meant more flatworms. The scientists
concluded that the atrazine indirectly increased parasitism in the
frogs by increasing the population of snail hosts.15
Pesticides and contaminants may affect more than just the
populations of animals and plants that make up a community. They may
also affect basic processes like nutrient cycling or the formation of
soil. For example, nitrogen cycling may be affected if pesticides
impact the bacteria and fungal communities in soil.16 There
may be a time lag between the pesticide exposure and the ultimate
effects. The pesticide could be gone before the damage it caused also
disappears.
How are products evaluated for their risk to the environment?
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency
(U.S. EPA) reviews all pesticides before the products are registered
for sale. They require companies to submit the results from standard
toxicity tests as part of the application for registration. Depending
on how and where the products are going to be used, companies may have
to conduct more or different types of studies. A product meant only
for use in someone's home may not require toxicity tests on fish. That
information would be required for a product that will be applied on
aquatic weeds. The U.S. EPA registers pesticides when the benefits
outweigh the risks, assuming products are used according to the label
directions.
When you are deciding whether or not to use a pesticide, balance
the potential benefit against the potential costs, including
environmental impacts. Sometimes using a pesticide, even according to
its label, may cause harm. When that's the case, it is up to the user
to weigh the costs and benefits, and if necessary, choose not to use
the product.
If you use a pesticide, always be sure you read and follow all
label instructions exactly. It will reduce the risk, but it won't
necessarily prevent accidents. Read the environmental hazards part of
the label carefully. Could use of this product harm bees or bats, or
is it very toxic to fish? If so, and if fish or bees could be exposed,
you might consider finding another product. Try to find the least
toxic product that will do the job. It may be possible to take care of
your pest problem using integrated
pest
management, which may mean using fewer pesticides, or possibly
none at all.
You know your application area best. If you know certain spots are
important places for special plants or wildlife, try to prevent
contamination of those sites, especially at critical times of the
year. You may also contact your state wildlife agency or the US Fish
and Wildlife Service for more information. There are many federal and
state laws protecting migratory birds, animals, and rare plants, but
the most important protections come from ordinary people taking steps
to avoid accident al harm.
Date Reviewed: March 2011
- Newman, M. C.; Unger, M. A. Fundametals of ecotoxicology, 2nd ed.; Lewis Publishers: Boca
Raton, FL,
2003; pp 53, 76, 95.
- Bradford, D. F.; Heithmar, E. M.; Tallent-Halsell, N. G.; Momplaisir, G-M.; Rosal, C. G.; Varner, K. E.;
Nash, M., S.; Riddick, L. A. Temporal
patterns and sources of atmospherically deposited pesticides in alpine lakes of the Sierra Nevada,
California, U.S.A. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2010, 44, 4609-4614.
- Hageman, K. J.; Hafner, W. D.; Campbell, D. H.; Jaffe, D. A.; Landers, D. H.; Simonich, S. L. M.
Variability
in pesticide deposition and source
contributions to snowpacks in western U.S. national parks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010,
44,
4452-4458.
- Bidleman, T. F.; Walla, M. D.; Roura, R.; Car, E.; Schmidt, S. Organochlorine pesticides in the
atmosphere
of the Southern Ocean and
Antarctica, January-March, 1990. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 1993, 26 (5), 258-262.
- Halsall, C. J., Investigating the occurrence of persistant organic pollutants (POPS) in the arctic:
their
atmospheric behavior and
interaction with the seasonal snow pack. Environ. Pollut. 2004, 128, 163-175.
- Best, L. B.; Fischer, D. L. Granular insecticides and birds: factors to be considered in understanding
exposure and reducing risk.
Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1992, 11, 1495-1508.
- Balcomb, R.; Bowen, C. A.; Wright, D.; Law, M. Effects on wildlife of at-planting corn applications of
granular carbofuran. J. Wildl.
Manage. 1984, 48 (4), 1353-1359.
- Taylor, I. Barn owls: Predator-prey relationships and conservation. Cambridge University
Press:
Cambridge, UK, 1994; p 304.
- Fair, J. M.; Kennedy, P. L.; McEwen, L. C. Effects of carbaryl grasshopper control on nesting killdeer
in
North Dakota. Environ. Toxicol.
Chem. 1995, 14 (5), 881-890.
- Baldwin, D. H.; Spromberg, J. A.; Collier, T. K.; Scholz, N. L., A fish of many scales: extrapolating
sublethal pesticide exposures to the
productivity of wild salmon populations. Ecol. Appl. 2009, 19 (8), 2004-2015.
- Pimentel, D.; Edwards, C. A. Pesticides and Ecosystems. Bioscience 1982, 32 (7), 595-600.
- Poulin, B.; Lefebvre, G.; Paz, L. Red flag for green spray: adverse trophic effects of Bti on breeding
birds. J. Appl. Ecol. 2010, 47, 884-889.
- Kreutzweiser, D. P.; Good, K. P.; Chartrand, D. T. Are leaves that fall from imidacloprid-treated maple
trees to control Asian longhorned
beetles toxic to non-target decomposer organisms? J. Environ. Qual. 2008, 37, 639-646.
- Relyea, R.; Diecks, N. An unforseen chain of events: lethal effects of pesticides on frogs at sublethal
concentrations. Ecol. Appl. 2008,
18 (7), 1728-1742.
- Rohr, J. R.; Schotthoefer, A. M.; Raffel, T. R.; Carrick, H. J.; Halstead, N.; Hoverman, J. T.; Johnson,
C.
M.; Johnson, L. B.; Lieske, C.; Piwoni, M.
D.; Schoff, P. K.; Beasley, V. R. Agrochemicals increase trematode infections in a declining amphibian
species. Nature 2008, 455, 1235-
1239.
- Lo, C-C. Effect of pesticides on soil microbial community. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B
2010, 45,
348-359.
NPIC fact sheets are designed to answer questions
that
are
commonly
asked by the general public about pesticides that are regulated by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). This document is
intended to be educational in nature and helpful to consumers for
making decisions about pesticide use.