Ecological risk assessment for the National Gypsy Moth Management Program

348 Pages·1994·21.4 MB·English

Historic, Archive Document
Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

Reserve
aSB945
.G9E36
1994
Ecological Risk Assessment
for the
National Gypsy Moth
Management Program
Prepared by:
Environmental Analysis and Documentation
Biotechnology, Biologics, and Environmental Protection
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA
with the assistance of
Dr. Robert Campbell (College of Environmental Science and Forestry, SUNY),
Dr. Steven Bartell (SENES Oakridge, Inc.), and
Dr. Anthony Gray (Syracuse Research Corp.)
September 1994
Calitcle sye ayiets
Department of
Agriculture
NATIONAL
AGRICULTURAL
By
LIBRARY
Advancing Access to
Global Information for
Agriculture
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
‘lige Introduction
ie Background and Purpose
By. Ecological Risk Assessment Poocees
ie. Exposure and Risk from Gypsy Moth II-1
The Forest Environment oie)
Gypsy Moth Biology : II-2
Gypsy Moth Infestation History II-8
Outbreak Duration : : PLsy
Ecological Effects of Tnfestations II-13
Scenarios : EE-39
Exposure Receeemene II-40
Risk Assessment II-40
HUQOSQumWmwaAryO ANwP II-48
References II-49
III. Characterization of Active Management Strategies and
Treatments III-1l
aFsa :
A. Description of Active Gypsy Moth Management
Strategies SD le
Be Description of foci concer Moth Menaeenent!
Treatments III-3
References II1I-6
IV. Description of Program Areas
The Two Ecosystem Approach IV-1
The Development Continuum IV-2
Physical Characteristics IV-2
Biotic Characteristics IV-5
aao>©@o Summary IV-8
References IV-9
V. Hazard Analysis
Ike, Toxicity Data
'
B. Terrestrial Field studies Ka}
C Aquatic Field Studies
References ee‘' e NPR w
Ti
VI. Endpoint Selection . VI-1
A. Change in Forest Health : : VI-1
B. Change in Numbers of Nontarget Species Or
Their Populations Vi-Z
C. Change in Water Quality NI -2
D. Change in Microclimate Vi=3
E. Change in Soil Fertility, productivity) Or Stability VI-3
F. Summary eV
VII. The Fate and Transport of Insecticides in the Environment . VII-1l
A. Diflubenzuron Vil
Breebaciriuis Marraticnacle retake (Btk) VII-13
Cy NPV : VII-16
De Diepaciece VII-18
E. Dichlorvos : Vin-~19
F. Environmental Fate And Transport Moddldaqe. Vir-19
References ViT-31
VIII. Exposure Assessment Vigi-1
A. Diflubenzuron ; VIET =1
B. 4-Chloroaniline (Deevadaeton Produce a
Diflubenzuron) VIII-4
G. Btk VIII-4
D. Disparlure : VIITI-5
E. Nueleopom memes t. Virus VIII-6
F. Dichlorvos VIII-6
References VIII-7
IX. Risk Assessment IX-1
A. Diflubenzuron IX-1
Be 7 Btk IX-8
C. Disparlure IX-11
Dy Nucleopolyhedrosis Virus IX-12
E. Dichlorvos LAs
References IX-14
X. Conclusions
A. Comparative Risks Between Treatments X-1
B. Factors Affecting the Risk Associated
with the Treatments : X-3
C. Comparative Risk Between cecategies X-5
D. Comparative Risk Between Alternatives X-5
Glossary Glossary-1
iv
List of Figures
Figure LIet . CurrentaGeneratly finfestedtAreaqaiag 10 moalzsqeo/’ . I1-68
Figure Tie? . SUSCEPCIDI EVAL EAGIIGRORPE, Leah 170m Yaoys meeqgawws. IT-69
Figure L138 The relation of larval population (N,) in generation
n+l to larval population in generationn ..... II-70
Figure II-4. Relationship between trend in egg density (1) and egg
density per acre at the start of generation (NE,,));
Glenville and Eastford data (1958-64 and 1965-68) . II-/71
Figure Peas Decision-Tree for Gypsy Moth Management. ... . III-/7
Figure Vila Diflubenzuron and Btk Fate and Transport... . VII-40
Figure VII-2. AquaticPfate* and*Transportede © OP Reeede yi MeL eM, VII-41
Figure ViLass Bacillus@thuringiensisncrowthiGycles 2360 (50 me VII-42
Figure 1G he Cumulative frequency distribution of toxicological
studies using diflubenzuron on terrestrial organisms IX-20
Figure IX-2. Cumulative frequency distribution of toxicological
studies using diflubenzuron on aquatic organisms . IX-21
Figure 0.x ye Relationship between environmental concentration of
dfflubenzurom and.population@level srisk®y Yoiotees . ©I X=22
List of) Tables
Table II-1. Comparison of European and Asian Gypsy Moths .. . II-72
Table Ta 24 European Gypsy Moth Host Susceptibilitya(alteese<s . .aaEy3
Table Lier Short-term (st) and Long-term (lt) changes expected in
various ecosystem components, assuming a moderate
intensity outbreak (30-60 percent defoliation) that
persists forsl sb2sn0ru3 successivesyearsiege JeRi8e . .dieVv4
Table II-4. Short-term (st) and Long-term (lt) changes expected in
various ecosystem components, assuming a high
intensity outbreak (30-60 percent defoliation)
thats«persists for ljy2; or 3 successivesvyears =) ito
Table 1)S e be Treatment Rates Used in Eradication, Suppression
and Slow-the-Spread, Strategiesov? "ak S98? 3) ceee III-8
Table V-1. Toxicity Data of Bacillus thuringiensis var.
loims baloiate.” i425 8 eh deel ae = ee ee ee
Table V-2. Toxicity (Datasofgbiflubenzurondes 1¢R. green. Solvers. gL
Table V-32 Toxicity Data of Nucleopolyhedrosis Virus ..... V-63
Table V-4. DLowiGLtyevata -Of Dichlorvos means ce 0 eee ae V-67
Table V=5y Toxicity Datajef dispar ine iene Gee NoTeeaerease. 9V -7 1
Table V-6. Effects of BIK on nontarget Lepidoptera’. ..... V-72
Table V-7. Effects of BIK on parasites of Lepidoptera .... V-77
Table V-8. Ei bectssofeb lk sor idee @. 2. oe eoce oe, e V-82
Table V-9. Effects of diflubenzuron on nontarget Lepidoptera . V-84
Table V-10. Effects of diflubenzuron on predators and parasites
oft insects other than eypsy moth ome meyer rey ee Vie,
Table V-Le Effects of diflubenzuron on predators and parasites
OfecyVpsy moth cesses. Che cae en ee ee V-95
Table V-12. Effects of diflubenzuron on honey bees ...... 4V-97
Table Veo: Effects of diflubenzuron on other nontarget
invertebrates 055.) pansy eee eee V-99
Table V-14. Effects of diflubenzuron on birds =.) oa ne ve OS
vi
Table V=15. Toxicity data of Bacillus thuringiensis var.
kurstaki V-108
Table V-16. Toxicity data of diflubenzuron V-109
Table Miles. Ecological endpoints and their indicators VI-4
Table AR oa FSCBG Model Parameters VII-43
Table Vit=2) Summary of PRZM Input Parameters VII-44
Table Vir-oe Diflubenzuron Estimated Environmental Residues VII-47
Table VII-4. Multiple applications of diflubenzuron within the
same year VII-49
Table VII-5. Estimated diflubenzuron concentrations in various
environmental components 1.0 oz/ac VII-50
Table VII-6. Estimated diflubenzuron concentrations sisg l various
environmental components 0.5 oz/ac Vi Pood
Table Vile" Estimated diflubenzuron concentrations in various
environmental components 0.33 oz/ac Wei Sere
Table VII-8. Estimated diflubenzuron concentrations in various
environmental components 0.25 oz/ac VII293
Table Vile. Btk Estimated Environmental Residues VII-54
Table VIII-1. Btk exposure VIII-8
Table tk= 1% Organisms at risk from diflubenzuron based on the
screening index IX-23
Table ux 2. Variables used in Monte Carlo simulation IX-26
Table IX-3. Toxicological data used to estimate LCs, or ECs,
Dis eal putiron IX-28
Table IX-4. Percent of population affected by diflubenzuron
application IX-36
Table 1D. Ge Risk of encountering a Btk drop IX-41
Table 2 By Qualitative relative risk estimates by tactic
vii
uw 7 7 |
a i
7 <a
ev vheneigaltads <ul}iee€ Jo ned yiistweT ~ .t£-%
) eo: rr os pe ae.
Of-V wen we . ; Retwened¢ eo lsi«b6h Bo scab ystolxoT .; io ra- 9}
m chins Vppar * . , \R ee
rv a siatect tate abe ig bas atniog>as [eotgoton’ i~tV
tees ) mY sea eo
i: ie. ee " exo7see taf lebo& o4De4 . £-E8
‘ me? tee ; a 024 6k0646 red ha
iv vie, Stamens qw9nl- PSRs las queue SEN
: wnt datoSiettes) tose. é
é Ws a
iv re oh A wthi¢ok ‘i eqgne’ rival toceihant / AO FUSS a + jis: ;
ody otaiy bos genie le Bow egugs= 71 dae ad y 2
gid-TIV ; ; givad ireeiag « thee =
= ult
auctiny 2 oneisex-reones nerdssi sadlarhako-r bain lo Ul ea
fe -T1¥ , ; ‘sae O.f asrenaenas Je: same Lia
ure 09.8 =
suchsev oh xe liter Wwesses eee sents (226 bysaultes
fe-11¥ ia . —6 75 ee shisreqwoo [etnemnotivne
7 abi onelo var. 7 “5
odie: ol aeltassosonos solpmesdu({2b betamtsg2 9 it
gé-1IV . vaso 22.0 etisaggmes 2esesonoatvrs | Ly
- 7 Ps
evoluov ei ecolrextesoroo pomusaedy llth Sejyanizel : — ars)
tity owt yt a batynoe Ky leita takdiiias: ’
Ozat! : be % 7b ak dscoagng: 70% besemtes, mee ay
@+3ITV ; aoe Cee. ee _ wpraagee 128 i+
rid, tto oo wamtisiatnae *t ne tagyx0
es- 2] Es + « #ebat grinseise
* . *
o , a or ra ( tee ‘af Laeids pts ra ie _
aS<-Ki . ‘ not satana e #3com at beau esidaluav
¢ Z agec9a8 BeGo ®y hkél ei. o g og Seweu a=g ee d e a« zEt_gg oa7lt o _z t‘az a. a ;T
¢ GLOX1 .Uttecie.al <5 iaesyemh ial ntie: Tuts 3
2 . io 0 ¢ * nethy wat Se LB etd bedoubibe re wlen ee /
arenes ==
E-AI og ifens isoe reo A, of <aPey was 2
7 = 7 ne7
SoyKl od ite us 4, z% Sb yb anemone na “ " ' a Pee = -_
mK « ak » » solaog avew a “arg amtsae cook>, oulao n 4ev itsati >
ee ty iffvete Viti temp we 4
oa ae sell
an - stirs a @? th winner ve wl ven sa!
iArTer rs
a saa .