Occupational exposure and drift hazard during aerial application of paraquat to cotton (original) (raw)
Abstract
Two worker-exposure and drift trials were conducted during the aerial application of paraquat to cotton in California, USA. The dermal and respiratory exposure of pilots, flaggers, and a mixer-loader was shown to be low. Dermal exposure ranged from 0.05 (pilot) to 2.39 (flagger) mg/ hr. The dermal exposure of the mixer-loader was similar to that of the pilots. No respirable paraquat was detected in the breathing zone of any worker. The highest total paraquat concentration was 26.3 μg/m3 for a flagger, which is a factor of 19 less than the TLV for total paraquat. The combined dermal and respiratory exposure of this flagger was equivalent to 19.4 mg/8hr working day. Paraquat drift concentrations decreased with increasing distance downwind of the spray application. The highest concentrations of total and respirable paraquat were 16.7 and 0.15 μg/m3 at 50 m from the application site perimeter. The respective concentrations at 1600 m downwind were 0.5 and 0.01 μg/m3. Measurement of the particle size distribution of paraquat drift showed that 0.95 to 1.96% of spray droplets was within the respirable range at all distances downwind. The highest percentage of respirable droplets was equivalent to 1.2 (μg paraquat, which was measured at 400 m downwind. Respirable fractions of 1 and 0.95% were measured at 50 and 100 m downwind, which represented 1.8 μg paraquat. There was no evidence, therefore, of a toxic hazard to pilots, ground crew, and downwind bystanders, as a consequence of the aerial application of paraquat.
Access this article
Subscribe and save
- Get 10 units per month
- Download Article/Chapter or eBook
- 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
- Cancel anytime Subscribe now
Buy Now
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.
References
- Akesson NB, Yates WE, Cowden RE (1977). Procedures for evaluating the potential losses during and following pesticide application. Paper No 77-1504 presented at the 1977 Winter Meeting of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago, Illinois
- Andersen 2000 Inc (1976). Operating manual for high volume particle sizing samplers. Andersen 2000 Inc, Atlanta, Georgia
Google Scholar - Anonymous (1983). Threshold limit values for chemical sub-stances and physical agents in the workroom environment with intended changes for 1983-4. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, Ohio
- Chester G, Woollen BH (1982). Studies of the occupational exposure of Malaysian plantation workers to paraquat. Brit J Ind Med 39:23–33
Google Scholar - Documenta Geigy (1972) Scientific Tables. 7th edn. Diem K and Lentner C (ed). Ciba Geigy Limited, Basle, Switzerland
Google Scholar - Durham WF, Wolfe HR (1962). Measurement of exposure of workers to pesticides. Bull World Health Org 26:75–91
PubMed Google Scholar - Fresno County (California) Department of Agriculture (1979). Cotton harvest aid uses. Sacramento, California
- Hogarty C (1975). Exposure of spray operators to paraquat. Institute for Industrial Research and Standards, Dublin, Ireland
Google Scholar - Jegier Z (1964). Health hazards in insecticide spraying of crops. Arch Environ Health 8:670–674
Google Scholar - NIOSH/OSHA (1981). Occupational health guidelines for chemical hazard-paraquat. January. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC
Google Scholar - Orenstein AJ (1960) ed. Recommendations P619. Proc Pneumoconiosis. Conf. Univ of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa 1959. J A Churchill, London
Google Scholar - Richter ED, Cohen B, Livia M, Schoenberg J, Weisenberg E, Gordon M (1980). Exposure of aerial spray workers to parathion. Isr J Med Sci 16:96–100
PubMed Google Scholar - Seiber JN, Woodrow JE (1981). Sampling and analysis of air-borne residues of paraquat in treated cotton field environments. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 10:133–149
PubMed Google Scholar - Staiff DC, Comer SW, Armstrong JS, Wolfe HR (1975). Exposure to the herbicide paraquat. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 14:334–340
PubMed Google Scholar - Swan AAB (1969). Exposure of spray operators to paraquat. Brit J Ind Med 26:322–329
Google Scholar - Wojeck GA, Price JF, Nigg HN, Stamper JH (1983). Worker exposure to paraquat and diquat. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 12:65–70
PubMed Google Scholar - Wolfe HR, Durham WF, Armstrong JF (1967). Exposure of workers to pesticides. Arch Environ Health 14:622–633
PubMed Google Scholar - World Health Organization (1982). Field surveys of exposure to pesticides. Standard Protocol, VBC/82.1. Division of Vector Biology and Control, Geneva, Switzerland
Google Scholar - Yates WE, Akesson NB, Coutts HH (1966). Evaluation of drift residues from aerial applications. Trans ASAE 9:389–393, 397
Google Scholar - Yates WE, Akesson NB, Cowden RE (1974). Criteria for minimizing drift residues on crops downwind from aerial applications. Trans ASAE 17:627–632
Google Scholar
Author information
Author notes
- G. Chester
Present address: Plant Protection Division, Imperial Chemical Industries, PLC, GU27 3JE, Fenhurst, Haslemere Surrey, England
Authors and Affiliations
- Acute Toxicity Section, Imperial Chemical Industries PLC, Central Toxicology Laboratory, Alderley Park, K10 6TJ, Macclesfield, Cheshire, England
G. Chester & R. J. Ward
Authors
- G. Chester
You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar - R. J. Ward
You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chester, G., Ward, R.J. Occupational exposure and drift hazard during aerial application of paraquat to cotton.Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 13, 551–563 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01056333
- Received: 12 August 1981
- Revised: 30 January 1984
- Issue Date: September 1984
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01056333