Maria Arena

Neonicotinoids and bees: The case of the European regulatory risk assessment

Neonicotinoid insecticides are systemic pesticides authorised in Europe since 1991. From their introduction on the market, they have received significant attention from the scientific community, particularly regarding the assessment of lethal and sublethal effects on bees. The availability of scientific evidence alongside some concerns raised on the bee health led to the development of more articulate risk assessment methodologies for pesticides. To support the European Commission in its decision-making process, since 2012 EFSA has been requested to evaluate the risk to bees posed by the exposure to neonicotinoids. The outcome of the EFSA evaluations has been used by risk managers to revise the approval conditions of the substances clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam and to impose severe restrictions on their use. Meanwhile, a number of new studies have been carried out. EFSA is evaluating these data in order to further support the decision-making process with updated scientific assessments.

Peer review of the targeted hazard assessment of the pesticide active substance quinoxyfen

Abstract The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, the United Kingdom, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Austria, for the pesticide active substance quinoxyfen are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of information targeted at the assessment of the potential persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT), very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) and persistent organic pollutant (POP) properties of quinoxyfen according to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in these regulatory hazard cut off assessments are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. The concern is identified that quinoxyfen may be considered to exhibit the hazard properties of both a PBT and vPvB substance considering the triggers specified in Annex II of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance pethoxamid

Abstract The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Austria, and co‐rapporteur Member State, the Czech Republic, for the pesticide active substance pethoxamid are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of pethoxamid as a herbicide on maize and soya bean. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance mepanipyrim

Abstract The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Belgium, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Greece, for the pesticide active substance mepanipyrim are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of mepanipyrim as a fungicide on table and wine grapes, and in field and protected strawberries and tomatoes. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

Placing arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on the risk assessment test battery of plant protection products (PPPs)

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) are mutualistic symbionts considered a key group in soil systems involved in the provision of several ecosystem services. Recently they have been listed by EFSA as organisms to be included in the test battery for the risk assessment of plant protection product (PPPs). This study aimed to contribute to improve the ISO Protocol (ISO 10832: 2009) by assessing the feasibility of using other AMF species under different test conditions. Overall, results showed that AMF species Gigaspora albida and Rhizophagus clarus (selected out of five AMF species) are suitable to be used in spore germination tests using the ISO protocol (14 days incubation with sand or artificial soil as substrate) to test PPPs. However, several modifications to the protocol were made in order to accommodate the use of the tested isolates, namely the incubation temperature (28 °C instead of 24 °C) and the change of reference substance (boric acid instead of cadmium nitrate). The need for these changes, plus the results obtained with the three fungicides tested (chlorothalonil, mancozeb and metalaxyl-M) and comparisons made with literature on the relevance of the origin of AMF isolates in dictating the adequate test conditions, emphasize the importance of adjusting test conditions (AMF species/isolates and test temperature) when assessing effects for prospective risk assessment targeting different climatic zones. So, further studies should be conducted with different AMF species and isolates from different climatic regions, in order to better define which species/isolate and test conditions should be used to assess effects of a particular PPP targeting a given climatic zone.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance azadirachtin (Margosa extract)

Abstract The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, Germany, for the pesticide active substance azadirachtin are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the additional representative use of azadirachtin as an acaricide on greenhouse ornamentals. Conclusions are also represented for the representative use evaluated for the approval of azadirachtin, which was as an insecticide on potatoes. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance Bacillus subtilis strain IAB/BS03

Abstract The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State the Netherlands, for the pesticide active substance Bacillus subtilis strain IAB/BS03 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of B. subtilis strain IAB/BS03 as a fungicide on field lettuce, orchards and protected cucurbits. The reliable endpoints appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance tolclofos‐methyl

Abstract The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Sweden, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Denmark, for the pesticide active substance tolclofos‐methyl are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of tolclofos‐methyl as a fungicide on potatoes, lettuce and ornamentals. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance copper compounds copper(I), copper(II) variants namely copper hydroxide, copper oxychloride, tribasic copper sulfate, copper(I) oxide, Bordeaux mixture

Abstract The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, France, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Germany, for the pesticide active substance copper compounds are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of copper compounds as a fungicide on grapes, tomatoes and cucurbits. The reliable end points appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance fenpicoxamid (XDE‐777)

Abstract The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, the United Kingdom, for the pesticide active substance fenpicoxamid (XDE‐777) and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of fenpicoxamid (XDE‐777) as a fungicide on cereals (winter and spring wheat, durum wheat, rye and triticale). MRLs were assessed in rye and wheat (including triticale and spelt). An MRL application for the import tolerance on bananas was also assessed. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.