Stefania Barmaz
University of Milano-Bicocca
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Stefania Barmaz.
Agricultural and Forest Entomology | 2010
Claire Brittain; Riccardo Bommarco; Marco Vighi; Stefania Barmaz; Josef Settele; Simon G. Potts
1 Pesticides are considered a threat to pollinators but little is known about the potential impacts of their widespread use on pollinators. Less still is known about the impacts on pollination, comprising the ecosystem service that pollinators provide to wildflowers and crops. 2 The present study measured flower visitation and pollination in an agricultural landscape, by placing potted flowering plants (Petunia sp.) in vine fields sprayed with a highly toxic insecticide (fenitrothion). During two sampling rounds, insect visitors to the petunias were observed and measures of pollination were recorded by counting and weighing seeds. 3 In the earlier sampling round, a lower species richness of insect visitors was observed in fields that had received an early application of insecticide. No negative impacts were found from later applications. The results obtained suggest a greater potential harm to insect pollinators and flower visitation as a result of insecticide application early in the season. 4 No reduction in pollination was found in fields that received an early insecticide application. Pollination was greater with two insecticide applications between sampling rounds rather than one application. 5 In the present study system, insecticide application had a negative effect on pollinators but a possible positive effect on pollination services. In some cases, it may be that actions for conserving biodiversity will not benefit pollination services to all plants.
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety | 2011
Claudia Vaj; Stefania Barmaz; Peter Borgen Sørensen; David J. Spurgeon; Marco Vighi
Mixture toxicity is a real world problem and as such requires risk assessment solutions that can be applied within different geographic regions, across different spatial scales and in situations where the quantity of data available for the assessment varies. Moreover, the need for site specific procedures for assessing ecotoxicological risk for non-target species in non-target ecosystems also has to be recognised. The work presented in the paper addresses the real world effects of pesticide mixtures on natural communities. Initially, the location of risk hotspots is theoretically estimated through exposure modelling and the use of available toxicity data to predict potential community effects. The concept of Concentration Addition (CA) is applied to describe responses resulting from exposure of multiple pesticides The developed and refined exposure models are georeferenced (GIS-based) and include environmental and physico-chemical parameters, and site specific information on pesticide usage and land use. As a test of the risk assessment framework, the procedures have been applied on a suitable study areas, notably the River Meolo basin (Northern Italy), a catchment characterised by intensive agriculture, as well as comparative area for some assessments. Within the studied areas, the risks for individual chemicals and complex mixtures have been assessed on aquatic and terrestrial aboveground and belowground communities. Results from ecological surveys have been used to validate these risk assessment model predictions. Value and limitation of the approaches are described and the possibilities for larger scale applications in risk assessment are also discussed.
Ecotoxicology | 2010
Stefania Barmaz; Simon G. Potts; Marco Vighi
Pollination is one of the most important ecosystem services in agroecosystems and supports food production. Pollinators are potentially at risk being exposed to pesticides and the main route of exposure is direct contact, in some cases ingestion, of contaminated materials such as pollen, nectar, flowers and foliage. To date there are no suitable methods for predicting pesticide exposure for pollinators, therefore official procedures to assess pesticide risk are based on a Hazard Quotient. Here we develop a procedure to assess exposure and risk for pollinators based on the foraging behaviour of honeybees (Apis mellifera) and using this species as indicator representative of pollinating insects. The method was applied in 13 European field sites with different climatic, landscape and land use characteristics. The level of risk during the crop growing season was evaluated as a function of the active ingredients used and application regime. Risk levels were primarily determined by the agronomic practices employed (i.e. crop type, pest control method, pesticide use), and there was a clear temporal partitioning of risks through time. Generally the risk was higher in sites cultivated with permanent crops, such as vineyard and olive, than in annual crops, such as cereals and oil seed rape. The greatest level of risk is generally found at the beginning of the growing season for annual crops and later in June–July for permanent crops.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maria Arena; Domenica Auteri; Stefania Barmaz; Giulia Bellisai; Alba Brancato; Daniela Brocca; Laszlo Bura; Harry Byers; Arianna Chiusolo; Daniele Court Marques; Federica Crivellente; Chloe De Lentdecker; Mark Egsmose; Zoltan Erdos; Gabriella Fait; Lucien Ferreira; Marina Goumenou; Luna Greco; Alessio Ippolito; Frederique Istace; Samira Jarrah; Dimitra Kardassi; Renata Leuschner; Christopher Lythgo; Jose Oriol Magrans; Paula Medina; Ileana Miron; Tunde Molnar; Alexandre Nougadere; Laura Padovani
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.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Maria Arena; Domenica Auteri; Stefania Barmaz; Giulia Bellisai; Alba Brancato; Daniela Brocca; Laszlo Bura; Harry Byers; Arianna Chiusolo; Daniele Court Marques; Federica Crivellente; Chloe De Lentdecker; Marcella De Maglie; Mark Egsmose; Zoltan Erdos; Gabriella Fait; Lucien Ferreira; Marina Goumenou; Luna Greco; Alessio Ippolito; Frederique Istace; Judit Janossy; Samira Jarrah; Dimitra Kardassi; Renata Leuschner; Christopher Lythgo; Jose Oriol Magrans; Paula Medina; Ileana Miron; Tunde Molnar
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.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Maria Arena; Domenica Auteri; Stefania Barmaz; Giulia Bellisai; Alba Brancato; Daniela Brocca; Laszlo Bura; Harry Byers; Arianna Chiusolo; Daniele Court Marques; Federica Crivellente; Chloe De Lentdecker; Marcella De Maglie; Mark Egsmose; Zoltan Erdos; Gabriella Fait; Lucien Ferreira; Marina Goumenou; Luna Greco; Alessio Ippolito; Frederique Istace; Samira Jarrah; Dimitra Kardassi; Renata Leuschner; Christopher Lythgo; Jose Oriol Magrans; Paula Medina; Ileana Miron; Tunde Molnar; Alexandre Nougadere
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.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maria Arena; Domenica Auteri; Stefania Barmaz; Alba Brancato; Daniela Brocca; Laszlo Bura; Luis Carrasco Cabrera; Arianna Chiusolo; Daniele Court Marques; Federica Crivellente; Chloe De Lentdecker; Mark Egsmose; Gabriella Fait; Lucien Ferreira; Marina Goumenou; Luna Greco; Alessio Ippolito; Frederique Istace; Samira Jarrah; Dimitra Kardassi; Renata Leuschner; Christopher Lythgo; Jose Oriol Magrans; Paula Medina; Ileana Miron; Tunde Molnar; Laura Padovani; Juan Manuel Parra Morte; Ragnor Pedersen; Hermine Reich
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.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maria Arena; Domenica Auteri; Stefania Barmaz; Alba Brancato; Daniela Brocca; Laszlo Bura; Luis Carrasco Cabrera; Arianna Chiusolo; Daniele Court Marques; Federica Crivellente; Chloe De Lentdecker; Mark Egsmose; Gabriella Fait; Lucien Ferreira; Marina Goumenou; Luna Greco; Alessio Ippolito; Frederique Istace; Samira Jarrah; Dimitra Kardassi; Renata Leuschner; Christopher Lythgo; Jose Oriol Magrans; Paula Medina; Ileana Miron; Tunde Molnar; Alexandre Nougadere; Laura Padovani; Juan Manuel Parra Morte; Ragnor Pedersen
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.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maria Arena; Domenica Auteri; Stefania Barmaz; Giulia Bellisai; Alba Brancato; Daniela Brocca; Laszlo Bura; Harry Byers; Arianna Chiusolo; Daniele Court Marques; Federica Crivellente; Chloe De Lentdecker; Mark Egsmose; Zoltan Erdos; Gabriella Fait; Lucien Ferreira; Marina Goumenou; Luna Greco; Alessio Ippolito; Frederique Istace; Samira Jarrah; Dimitra Kardassi; Renata Leuschner; Christopher Lythgo; Jose Oriol Magrans; Paula Medina; Ileana Miron; Tunde Molnar; Alexandre Nougadere; Laura Padovani
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.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maria Arena; Domenica Auteri; Stefania Barmaz; Giulia Bellisai; Alba Brancato; Daniela Brocca; Laszlo Bura; Harry Byers; Arianna Chiusolo; Daniele Court Marques; Federica Crivellente; Chloe De Lentdecker; Mark Egsmose; Zoltan Erdos; Gabriella Fait; Lucien Ferreira; Marina Goumenou; Luna Greco; Alessio Ippolito; Frederique Istace; Samira Jarrah; Dimitra Kardassi; Renata Leuschner; Christopher Lythgo; Jose Oriol Magrans; Paula Medina; Ileana Miron; Tunde Molnar; Alexandre Nougadere; Laura Padovani
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.