Effects of the technical ingredient clomazone and its two formulated products on aquatic macrophytes

Abstract

One active ingredient can be a component of different types of formulations of pesticides, while the toxicity of its formulations may vary depending on various constituents used in the mixture. The present study focuses on evaluating the effects of the active ingredient clomazone and its formulations (Rampa® EC and GAT Cenit 36 CS, both containing 360 g a.i./l of clomazone) on non-target aquatic macrophytes. The two formulation types differ in their active ingredient release and presumed environmental impact. In order to cover different ecological traits, two species of aquatic macrophytes - the floating monocot Lemna minor and the rooted dicot Myriophyllum aquaticum, were used as test models. The results of this study revealed differences in the sensitivity of tested plants to clomazone. Based on the most sensitive parameters, M. aquaticum proved to be more sensitive than L. minor to the technical ingredient and both formulations. The species sensitivity distribution (SSD) approach that was tried out in an attempt to create a higher tier step of risk assessment of clomazone for primary producers indicates that tests on rooted macrophytes can add value in risk assessment of plant protection products. The capsule formulation of clomazone was less toxic than the emulsion for L. minor, but more toxic for M. aquaticum. The most toxic for L. minor was the emulsifiable concentrate formulation Rampa® EC, followed by technical clomazone (EC₅₀ 33.3 and 54.0 mg a.i./l, respectively), while the aqueous capsule suspension formulation GAT Cenit 36 CS did not cause adverse effects. On the other hand, the most toxic for M. aquaticum was the formulation GAT Cenit 36 CS, followed by technical clomazone and the formulation Rampa® EC, demonstrating a greater effect of the capsule formulation.

Keywords: Clomazone; Formulations; Primary producers; Risk assessment; Species sensitivity distribution.