INRA (French National Institute for Agricultural Research), UMR 1202 BIOGECO, University of Bordeaux, 33610 Cestas, France.
Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, TERRA, Université de Liège, 5030 Gembloux, Belgium.
Environ Int. 2019 Aug;129:423-429. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2019.04.045. Epub 2019 May 29.
The European Food Safety Authority concluded in February 2018 that "most uses of neonicotinoid insecticides represent a risk to wild bees and honeybees". In 2016, the French government passed a law banning the use of the five neonicotinoids previously authorized: clothianidin, imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, acetamiprid and thiacloprid. In the framework of an expert assessment conducted by the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety to identify possible derogations, we performed a thorough assessment of the available alternatives to the five banned neonicotinoids. For each pest targeted by neonicotinoids use, we identified the main alternative pest management methods, which we then ranked for (i) efficacy for controlling the target pest, (ii) applicability (whether directly useable by farmers or in need of further research and development), (iii) durability (risk of resistance in targeted pests), and (iv) practicability (ease of implementation by farmers). We identified 152 authorized uses of neonicotinoids in France, encompassing 120 crops and 279 pest insect species (or genera). An effective alternative to neonicotinoids use was available in 96% of the 2968 case studies analyzed from the literature (single combinations of one alternative pest control method or product × one target crop plant × one target pest insect). The most common alternative to neonicotinoids (89% of cases) was the use of another chemical insecticide (mostly pyrethroids). However, in 78% of cases, at least one non-chemical alternative method could replace neonicotinoids (e.g. microorganisms, semiochemicals or surface coating). The relevance of non-chemical alternatives to neonicotinoids depends on pest feeding habits. Leaf and flower feeders are easier to control with non-chemical methods, whereas wood and root feeders are more difficult to manage by such methods. We also found that further field studies were required for many promising non-chemical methods before their introduction into routine use by farmers. Our findings, transmitted to policymakers, indicate that non-chemical alternatives to neonicotinoids do exist. Furthermore, they highlight the need to promote these methods through regulation and funding, with a view to reducing pesticide use in agriculture.
欧洲食品安全局在 2018 年 2 月得出结论,“新烟碱类杀虫剂的大多数用途对野生蜜蜂和家蜜蜂构成了风险”。2016 年,法国政府通过了一项法律,禁止使用之前授权的五种新烟碱类杀虫剂:噻虫啉、吡虫啉、噻虫嗪、噻虫胺和噻虫砜。在法国食品、环境和职业健康与安全局进行的一项专家评估框架内,为了确定可能的豁免,我们对五种禁用新烟碱类杀虫剂的替代品进行了全面评估。对于每种使用新烟碱类杀虫剂防治的害虫,我们确定了主要的替代害虫管理方法,然后对这些方法进行了排名,排名依据是:(i)防治目标害虫的功效,(ii)适用性(是否可直接由农民使用或是否需要进一步的研究和开发),(iii)持久性(目标害虫产生抗药性的风险),以及(iv)可行性(农民实施的难易程度)。我们在法国发现了 152 种新烟碱类杀虫剂的授权用途,涵盖了 120 种作物和 279 种害虫昆虫物种(或属)。在对文献中分析的 2968 个案例研究(单一组合一种替代害虫防治方法或产品×一种目标作物植物×一种目标害虫昆虫)进行评估后,我们发现 96%的情况下都有新烟碱类杀虫剂的有效替代品。最常见的新烟碱类杀虫剂替代品(89%的情况)是使用另一种化学杀虫剂(主要是拟除虫菊酯)。然而,在 78%的情况下,至少有一种非化学替代方法可以替代新烟碱类杀虫剂(例如微生物、信息素或表面涂层)。非化学新烟碱类杀虫剂替代品的相关性取决于害虫的取食习惯。叶片和花朵取食者更容易用非化学方法控制,而木质部和根部取食者则更难用这种方法管理。我们还发现,在将许多有前途的非化学方法引入农民的常规使用之前,还需要进行更多的田间研究。我们的研究结果传达给政策制定者后,表明确实存在替代新烟碱类杀虫剂的非化学方法。此外,这些结果还强调需要通过监管和资金来推广这些方法,以减少农业中的农药使用。