Lexington, KY 40546

Online at: www.uky.edu/KPN

Number 1327
PESTICIDE NEWS AND VIEWS -Links between Certain Fungicides and Parkinson Disease

January 15, 2013

GREENHOUSE -Sticky card monitoring system for greenhouse pests -Planning checklist for pasture fly control 2013

PESTICIDE NEWS AND VIEWS Links between Certain Fungicides and Parkinson Disease By Paul Vincelli, Kenny Seebold, Don Hershman, and Nicole Ward, Extension Plant Pathologists Several years ago, we reported on a study raising concerns about chronic exposure to certain pesticides and Parkinson disease1. Parkinson disease is a progressive neurological disease that causes tremors, impaired balance, and other symptoms. Previous research has raised concerns about the fungicide maneb and the herbicide paraquat. Maneb is the active ingredient in products such as Maneb and Manex. Paraquat is found in a variety of herbicidal products, including Gramoxone. A new study raises concerns about another fungicide widely used in the past: benomyl. Benomyl was the active ingredient in Benlate, previously labeled for use on many horticultural crops, including fruits, vegetables, turfgrasses, and ornamentals. Benomyl was present in several commercial products, and EPA registrations for those products were cancelled during the period 2001-2002. Key Findings This new study2 presents two lines of evidence for concern about exposure to benomyl and Parkinson disease. 1. Epidemiological evidence. The study compared Parkinson incidence among people with no, low, or high occupational exposure to treated fields. Those in the

low category had no increased risk of disease, but the high exposure group had a 67% higher risk of the disease. In this study, residential exposure to benomyl did not present an increased risk of Parkinson disease; only high occupational exposure did. 2. Biochemical evidence. Laboratory studies were conducted, as well. Like all complex organic molecules, benomyl natural breaks down in living cells into other chemicals, (called metabolites). In this new paper, the authors reported that certain metabolites of benomyl interfered with an important human enzyme abbreviated ALDH. Disruption of ALDH activity in nerve cells may be involved in the development of Parkinson disease. Significance Although over a decade has passed since the cancellation of benomyl uses in the USA, this new study raises a cautionary note about pesticide use. It serves as a reminder to: Minimize worker exposure when using pesticides. Use appropriate protective clothing, wash/shower after applying pesticides, and employ all the other safety practices recommended during pesticide applicator training. Minimize pesticide use where possible, by using all appropriate means to manage pests, diseases, and weeds (the IPM philosophy).

There is one aspect about this new research that we are grateful for: There is no indication (at least so far) that fungicides related to benomyl pose a similar risk. In particular, thiophanate-methyl is a widely used fungicide for disease control on many crops. It has been sold in Kentucky under trade names such as Clearys 3336, Incognito, TMethyl, Topsin-M, and Transom. Thiophanatemethyl is in the same fungicide family as benomyl, and upon degradation, some of the same metabolites are produced as by benomyl. However, none of the metabolites produced by thiophanate-methyl3 were reported to pose a risk in the new study. So there is no reason at this time to wave a red flag over the use of thiophanatemethyl. However, keep in mind that further study may raise concerns over thiophanate-methyl. While we appreciate the role that pesticides play in sustainable intensification of agricultural productivity, our advice is to be careful with the use of all pesticides, so that we have no reason to look back with regret. Sources of Information Vincelli, 2009. Link between Certain Pesticides and Parkinson's Disease. Kentucky Pest News, http://www.uky.edu/Ag/kpn/kpn_09/pn_090602.ht ml#PNV. 2 Fitzmaurice et al, 2012. Aldehyde dehydrogenase inhibition as a pathogenic mechanism in Parkinson disease. PNAS, www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1220399110. 3 Thiophanate-methyl, JMPR 1973, http://www.inchem.org/documents/jmpr/jmpmono /v073pr22.htm
1

GREENHOUSE Sticky card monitoring system for greenhouse pests By Lee Townsend, Extension Entomologist Sticky cards are an excellent monitoring tool that that can help to stay on top of gnats, shore flies, and other insect pests in the greenhouse. Yellow and blue monitoring cards are available. Yellow is attractive to gnats, whiteflies, and winged aphids; thrips respond well to blue. Many sticky cards are imprinted with a grid aids in counting the insects. General recommendations call for about 4 cards per 1,000 square feet of area plus cards near entry ways and intake vents. Check the accompanying instructions on height above the plant canopy and orientation of the card. Vertical cards are generally attractive landing surfaces but some insects prefer a horizontal surface.

Figure 1. Gnats on yellow sticky card. Note long antennae, and mosquito-like appearance of gnats. Shore flies have very short antennae and a heavier body.

Correct Identification of card catches is important. Several species of very different insects that are superficially similar are attracted to sticky cards. Winged aphids, fungus gnats, and shore flies are good examples. The management strategies for these are very different and misidentification could lead to the expense of ineffective control measure while infestations continue to increase.

Planning checklist for pasture fly control 2013 By Lee Townsend , Extension Entomologist The price break on early orders is a big incentive to make control purchases well before the pest season begins. Here are a few things to consider as you weight the options and make your decisions on face fly and horn fly control: What is your key pest? A key pest is one that is there every year, and when it is bad, causes significant losses in reduced gains and extra expense in time and effort. In Kentucky it is usually either the face fly, and associated pink eye, or the horn fly. Since face flies and horn flies are around every herd, the one that is consistently the greater problem is the one to build the program around. While most fly control products and approaches are labeled for both pests, there are some differences in effectiveness. The face fly is the more challenging pest because it spends very little time on animals, mostly on the hard-to-treat face where it feeds on tears, saliva, and mucus. In contrast, blood-feeding horn flies spend most all of their time on the more easily treated sides and back of cattle. Select the control strategy that puts the protection where it is needed. Consider grazing practices and pasture layout. If cattle are in pastures with controlled access to water and mineral, then forced-used or selftreatment options like dust bags, back rubbers, or automatic spray devices can be economical and effective. Careful hanging of dust bags or suspending flyflips or other supplemental treatment devices to ensure treatment of the head and face can give very good face fly and horn fly control. Adjusting the nozzles on automatic sprayers will direct the liquid to the target most effectively. These selfapplication systems require some maintenance and their insecticide dispensers have to be checked and refilled as needed.

If animals are moved regularly in a rotational grazing program, then fixed application stations may be less practical. Insecticidal ear tags provide a portable fly control system that moves with the animal. Tags tend to give very good horn fly control and a reduction in face fly numbers per head. Spray or pour-on insecticides may be practical and very economical for horn fly control if there is a means of gathering up and confining / handling animals about once a month during the fly season. Past performance. What was your 2012 fly control program? Were you satisfied with it? The satisfaction level can be difficult to judge, especially with drought conditions over much of the state. Face fly and horn fly populations are affected by general weather conditions, especially rainfall. Consequently, fly numbers on cattle can be due as much to weather conditions as product performance. Resistance management. Its important to consider your long term insecticide use patterns. Continued use of insecticides from the same chemical family can lead to the development of pest populations that are more difficult to control. If you have been using pyrethroid ear tags for several consecutive years, incorporate insecticides with different modes of action into your program. Tags are available with insecticides having one of several ways of attacking the pest, and there are some combination tags that pair insecticides with different modes of action. There are many options for pasture fly control. Matching products and application methods best suited for your key pest and herd management practices will help you pick an effective strategy.

Note: Trade names are used to simplify the information presented in this newsletter. No endorsement by the Cooperative Extension Service is intended, nor is criticism implied of similar products that are not named.