Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 2 of 141

Table of Contents

BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................................4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................................4

REGULATORY RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................5

PRE-REGISTRATION DATA NEEDS .............................................................................................................................5

CONDITION-OF-REGISTRATION DATA NEEDS............................................................................................................5

TOLERANCE CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................................................................................5

Analytical Method................................................................................................................................................5

Livestock Commodity Method ............................................................................................................................6

RECOMMENDED TOLERANCES...................................................................................................................................6

INTERNATIONAL HARMONIZATION............................................................................................................................9

REVISIONS TO PETITIONED-FOR TOLERANCES ........................................................................................................12

RESIDUE PROFILE ....................................................................................................................................................12

RESIDUE CHEMISTRY GUIDELINES....................................................................................................................15

DIRECTIONS FOR USE (860.1200)............................................................................................................................15

NATURE OF THE RESIDUE (860.1300)......................................................................................................................16

Plants..................................................................................................................................................................16

Tomato ..........................................................................................................................................................17

Lettuce...........................................................................................................................................................20

Succulent Peas...............................................................................................................................................21

Rice ...............................................................................................................................................................23

Livestock Metabolism........................................................................................................................................26

Poultry Metabolism (Laying Hens)...............................................................................................................28

Lactating Goat Metabolism...........................................................................................................................31

RESIDUE ANALYTICAL METHODS (860.1340) .........................................................................................................37

Enforcement method in plant matrices...............................................................................................................37

Data generation methods in plants.....................................................................................................................38

Enforcement method in animal matrices............................................................................................................38

Data generation methods for animal matrices....................................................................................................39

Radiovalidation of enforcement methods for plants and animal matrices .........................................................39

MULTIRESIDUE METHODS (860.1360).....................................................................................................................40

STORAGE STABILITY (860.1380).............................................................................................................................40

WATER, FISH, AND IRRIGATED CROPS (860.1400)...................................................................................................41

FOOD HANDLING (860.1460)...................................................................................................................................41

MEAT, MILK, POULTRY, AND EGGS (860.1480) ......................................................................................................41

Poultry................................................................................................................................................................41

Cattle ..................................................................................................................................................................44

MAXIMUM REASONABLY BALANCED DIETS (MRBDS)...........................................................................................47

POTENTIAL RESIDUE LEVELS IN MILK, EGGS, AND TISSUES....................................................................................50

CROP FIELD TRIALS (860.1500) ..............................................................................................................................53

ROOT AND TUBER VEGETABLES, CROP GROUP 1....................................................................................................54

LEAVES OF ROOT AND TUBER VEGETABLE, CROP GROUP 2....................................................................................56

BULB VEGETABLES, CROP GROUP 3........................................................................................................................56

LEAFY VEGETABLES (EXCEPT BRASSICA VEGETABLES), CROP GROUP 4 .................................................................56

BRASSICA (COLE) LEAFY VEGETABLES, CROP GROUP 5 ..........................................................................................59

LEGUME VEGETABLES (SUCCULENT OR DRIED), CROP GROUP 6 ............................................................................60

FOLIAGE OF LEGUME VEGETABLE, CROP GROUP 7 .................................................................................................61

FRUITING VEGETABLE, CROP GROUP 8 ...................................................................................................................61

CUCURBIT VEGETABLE, CROP GROUP 9 ..................................................................................................................63

CITRUS FRUIT, CROP GROUP 10 ..............................................................................................................................64

POME FRUIT, CROP GROUP 11 .................................................................................................................................65
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 3 of 141

STONE FRUIT, CROP GROUP 12................................................................................................................................67

BERRIES GROUP, CROP GROUP 13...........................................................................................................................69

TREE NUTS, CROP GROUP 14...................................................................................................................................70

CEREAL GRAIN, CROP GROUP 15 ............................................................................................................................70

FORAGE, FODDER AND STRAW OF CEREAL GRAIN, CROP GROUP 16.......................................................................72

OILSEED, CROP GROUP 20.......................................................................................................................................73

PROCESSED FOOD AND FEED (860.1520).................................................................................................................75

CONFINED ACCUMULATION IN ROTATIONAL CROPS (FIELD; 860.1850)..................................................................83

FIELD ACCUMULATION IN ROTATIONAL CROPS (FIELD; 860.1900).........................................................................85

TOLERANCE DERIVATION....................................................................................................................................86

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................................................................88

860.1300 NATURE OF THE RESIDUE -PLANTS, LIVESTOCK........................................................................................88

860.1340 RESIDUE ANALYTICAL METHOD...............................................................................................................88

860.1360 MULTIRESIDUE METHOD ..........................................................................................................................89

860.1380 STORAGE STABILITY DATA.......................................................................................................................90

860.1480 MEAT/MILK/POULTRY/EGGS ....................................................................................................................90

860.1500 CROP FIELD TRIALS ..................................................................................................................................90

860.1520 PROCESSED FOOD/FEED..........................................................................................................................100

860.1850 CROP ROTATION STUDIES......................................................................................................................102

NON-GUIDELINE STUDIES .....................................................................................................................................102

APPENDIX 1. TOLERANCE SUMMARY FOR SULFOXAFLOR......................................................................104

APPENDIX 2. FIELD TRIAL GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION. .........................................................................108

APPENDIX 3. SUMMARY TABLE OF NAFTA AND EUROPEAN FIELD TRIAL DATA ..............................109

APPENDIX 4. FIELD TRIAL DATA AND OECD MRL CALCULATOR OUTPUT ..........................................113

APPENDIX 5. INDIVIDUAL MRLS FOR REPRESENTATIVE COMMODITIES AND CROP GROUP MRLS

...................................................................................................................................................................................136

APPENDIX 6. STRUCTURES OF IMPORTANT METABOLITES AND DEGRADATES FOUND IN 

METABOLISM STUDIES, CONFINED ROTATIONAL CROP STUDY, CROP FIELD TRIALS, LIVESTOCK 

FEEDING STUDIES, AND ENVIRONMENTAL FATE STUDIES. .....................................................................140
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 4 of 141

Background

Sulfoxaflor {N-[methyloxido[1-[6-(trifluoromethyl)-3-pyridinyl]ethyl]-γ

4

-sulfanylidene]

cyanamide} is the first member of the sulfoximine class of insecticides. It controls insects via a 

unique interaction with the insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptor. It is currently proposed for 

foliar applications only. The petitioner, DowAgroScience, LLC, is requesting registration of the 

new insecticide sulfoxaflor, on 39 crops/crop groups and establishment of permanent tolerances 

for residues in/on those crops/crop groups. These are the first uses for this new insecticide. The 

data were evaluated under a joint review agreement between Canada’s Pest Management 

Regulatory Agency (PMRA), Australia’s Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority

(APVMA) and the USEPA.

This document summarizes information contained in a large number of residue chemistry Tier 2

summaries that were prepared by PMRA and HED. Those Tier 2 summaries are contained in 4 

separate monographs that are referenced throughout this document. The first monograph, 

sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7: Residue

data, contains Tier 2 summaries relating to metabolism in plants and livestock, livestock feeding 

studies, storage stability of residues, crop field trials, and processing studies. This monograph 

was prepared by PMRA and USEPA. The monograph for the analytical methods, sulfoxaflor

(XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B5: Methods of Analysis

was prepared by PMRA. The third monograph, prepared by USEPA, contains field trial Tier 2

summaries and is titled Sulfoxaflor OECD Joint Review Project, Section B.7: Residue Data. 

The final monograph, prepared by PMRA, contains processing study Tier 2 summaries and is 

titled sulfoxaflor OECD Joint Review Project, Section B.7.7: Effects of Industrial Processing 

and/or Household Preparation. 

Two formulations are proposed for registration: GF-2032 which is a suspension concentrate 

containing 2 lbs of a.i. per gallon (21.8%) and GF-2372 which is a water dispensable granule 

(WDG) containing 50% a.i. by weight.

Executive Summary

Acceptable data were submitted depicting metabolism in crops and livestock; analytical 

methods; storage stability; and residues in target crops, rotational crops, processed foods/feeds, 

and livestock commodities. The data are adequate to support tolerance evaluation/enforcement

and human health risk assessment.

The global review team has determined the residue definition for tolerance enforcement and risk 

assessment to be the parent compound, sulfoxaflor, only for both plant and livestock 

commodities. Adequate analytical methods, utilizing solvent extraction and liquid 

chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) techniques are available to 

enforce tolerances in crops and livestock. Field trials and feeding studies with sulfoxaflor 

indicate that tolerances are needed for both crops and livestock. Tolerance levels recommended 

by the USEPA are summarized in Table 1. These tolerances have been harmonized, to the extent 

possible, with those recommended by our global review partners and the Joint Meeting on 

Pesticide Residues (JMPR) at their 2011 meeting.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 5 of 141

Regulatory Recommendations

Provided the submitted Section F and product labels are revised as noted below, there are no 

residue chemistry issues that would preclude granting the requested Section 3 registration for 

sulfoxaflor and for the recommended tolerances on the proposed commodities as listed in Table 

1 below. The tolerance expression for plant and livestock commodities is provided below, in the 

Recommended Tolerances section of this document.

The sulfoxaflor labels should limit application to soybean forage to two applications, as

supported by the available residue data.

Pre-Registration Data Needs

The registrant needs to submit a revised Section F in which the recommended tolerances listed in 

Table 1 are proposed.

Condition-of-Registration Data Needs

No residue chemistry conditional registration data needs are associated with this tolerance 

petition.

Tolerance Considerations

Analytical Method

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B5: Methods of Analysis

Plant Methods - Residues of Sulfloxaflor and its metabolites in crops were determined using 

Dow analytical Methods 091031 or 091116. Enforcement Method for the Determination of 

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208) and its Main Metabolites in Agricultural Commodities using Offline 

Solid-Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass Spectrometry Detection.

This method is applicable for the quantitative determination of residues of sulfoxaflor and its 

metabolites, X11719474, N-((methyl)oxido){1-[6-(trifluoromethyl)pyridine-3-yl]ethyl}-λ4-

sulfanylidene)urea, and X11721061, 1-[6-(trifluoromethyl)pyridin-3-yl]ethanol, in agricultural 

commodities and its processed products. The method was validated over the concentration range 

of 0.010-5.0 mg/kg with a validated limit of quantitation of 0.010 mg/kg for all matrices 

involved in this registration action. The registrant submitted acceptable radio validation data and 

an acceptable independent laboratory validation (ILV). The Dow AgroSciences Study Number 

091188 will be forwarded to FDA for inclusion in PAM II. The method can also be obtained 

from the Analytical Chemistry Branch of the Biological and Economic Analysis Division 

(ACB/BEAD).

The FDA Multi-Residue Method was reported by the registrant as unsuitable for analysis of 

sulfoxaflor and/or its metabolites. HED notes that there are similarities between the German 

DFG S19 method and the proposed enforcement method (Method 091116). It is expected that 

labs would obtain satisfactory results for sulfoxaflor residues using the DFG S19 method.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 6 of 141

Livestock Commodity Method

Residues of sulfoxaflor and the metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were determined in 

bovine and poultry matrices using analytical methods CEMS-4567, CEMS-4568, and 091188.

This method is applicable for the quantitative determination of residues of sulfoxaflor and its 

major metabolites (X11719474 and X11721061) in ruminant and poultry tissues. The method 

was validated over the concentration range of 0.010-1.0 mg/kg for all matrices with a validated 

limit of quantitation of 0.010 mg/kg. The registrant submitted an acceptable ILV. Methods 

CEMS-4567, CEMS-4568, and Dow AgroSciences Study Number 091188 will be forwarded to 

FDA for inclusion in PAM II. The method can also be obtained from ACB/BEAD.

The generally good agreement between the results from the metabolism study and the proposed 

enforcement methods (Method 091116 for plant commoditiess and 091188 for livestock 

commodities) demonstrates successful radio validation of the analytical method and provides 

assurance that the enforcement methods are capable of extracting bioincurred residues of interest 

from plant and animal commodities.

Recommended Tolerances

HED recommends that 40 CFR be amended by establishing tolerances for the plant and livestock 

commodities listed in the Table 1. As the residue definitions for plant and animal commodities 

are the same, HED recommends that the same entry be used for both types of commodities. The 

tolerances should be defined as follows:

 

Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide sulfoxaflor, including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only sulfoxaflor (N-[methyloxido[1-[6-

(trifluoromethyl)-3-pyridinyl]ethyl]-γ

4

-sulfanylidene]cyanamide).
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 7 of 141

Table 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor.1

Commodity Proposed 

Tolerance 

(ppm)

HEDRecommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity 

definition)

Almond, hulls 4.0 6.0

Barley, grain 0.15 0.40

Barley, hay 0.8 1.0

Barley, straw 1.5 2.0 Tolerance is higher than the HAFT, 

but lower than the maximum 

residue. Since the CODEX Global 

MRL recommended by JMPR is 2.0 

ppm, this value would be 

harmonized.

Bean, dry seed 0.25 0.20

Bean, succulent 0.7 4.0

Beet, sugar, dried pulp -- 0.07

Beet, sugar, molasses 0.03 0.25

Berry, low growing, subgroup 13-

07G

0.06 0.70

Cauliflower 0.08 0.08 Individual tolerance is being set 

because it exceeds a 5x factor.

Citrus, dried pulp 0.9 3.6

Cotton, hulls 0.4 0.35

Cotton, gin byproducts 8.0 6.0

Cottonseed subgroup 20C 0.2 0.20

Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 0.6 0.70

Fruit, pome, group 11-10 0.4 0.50

Fruit, small, vine climbing, 

subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy 

kiwi fruit

1.3 2.0

Fruit, stone, group 12 0.6 3.0

Grain, aspirated fractions -- 20.0

Grape, raisin 5.0 6.0 The calculated tolerance was 5.4 

ppm; however, HED recommends 

for a 6.0 ppm tolerance in order to 

harmonize with pending CODEX

Global MRL.

Leafy greens, subgroup 4A 5.0 6.0

Leafy petiole, subgroup 4B 1.0 2.0

Nuts, tree, group 14 0.02 0.015 

Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A 0.01 0.01

Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B 0.6 0.70

Pistachio 0.02 0.015 Pistachio requires a separate 

tolerance. Data for tree nuts are 

translated to pistachio.

Rapeseed, meal 0.5 0.50

Rapeseed subgroup 20A 0.3 0.40

Soybean, seed 0.2 0.20

Tomato, paste 1.6 2.6

Tomato, puree 0.7 1.2

Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 

5, except cauliflower

1.0 (5A)

1.6 (5B)

2.0
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 8 of 141

Table 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor.1

Commodity Proposed 

Tolerance 

(ppm)

HEDRecommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity 

definition)

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 0.3 (except 

squash)

0.40 Squash is included in HED’s 

recommended tolerance.

Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 1.2 0.7 The calculated tolerance was 0.9 

ppm; however, HED recommends 

for a 0.7 ppm tolerance in order to 

harmonize with CODEX.

Vegetable, leaves of root and tuber, 

group 2

4.0 3.0 Based on sugar beet and radish top 

data

Vegetable, legume, foliage, group 

7

-- 3.0

Vegetable, root and tuber, group 1 0.01 0.05

Watercress -- 6.0 Translated from subgroup 4A data, 

not a member of subgroup 4A.

Wheat, forage 0.8 1.0 Tolerance is higher than the HAFT, 

but lower than the maximum 

residue.

Wheat, grain 0.07 0.08

Wheat hay 1.1 1.5

Wheat, straw 2.0 2.0

Livestock Commodities

Cattle, meat 0.1 0.15

Cattle, fat 0.04 0.10

Cattle, kidney 0.2 -- See Cattle meat byproducts

Cattle, meat byproducts 0.25 0.40

Milk 0.08 0.15

Sheep, meat 0.1 0.15

Sheep, fat 0.04 0.10

Sheep, kidney 0.2 -- See Sheep meat byproducts

Sheep, meat byproducts (except 

kidney)

0.3 -- See Sheep meat byproducts

Sheep, meat byproducts -- 0.40

Hog, meat 0.01 0.01

Hog, fat 0.01 0.01

Hog, meat byproducts 0.04 0.01

Poultry, meat 0.01 0.01

Poultry, fat 0.01 0.01

Poultry, meat byproducts 0.03 0.01

Poultry, eggs 0.01 0.01

Horse, meat 0.1 0.15

Horse, fat 0.04 0.10

Horse, kidney 0.2 -- See Horse, meat byproducts

Horse, meat byproducts (except 

kidney)

0.3 -- See Horse, meat byproducts

Horse, meat byproducts -- 0.40

Goat, meat 0.1 0.15

Goat, fat 0.04 0.10

Goat, kidney 0.2 -- See Goat meat byproducts

Goat, meat byproducts (except 0.3 -- See Goat meat byproducts
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 9 of 141

Table 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor.1

Commodity Proposed 

Tolerance 

(ppm)

HEDRecommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity 

definition)

kidney)

Goat, meat byproducts -- 0.40

1. A complete list of the tolerances proposed by the petitioner is included in Appendix 1. All the proposed tolerances 

were not presented here in order to simplify the tolerance table and to reduce confusion. The petitioner proposed 

tolerances for many individual commodities and also proposed different tolerances for these same commodities as part 

of a crop group.

HED is recommending, for harmonization purposes (with PMRA), tolerances at the LOQ level 

(0.01 ppm) for sulfoxaflor in poultry meat, fat and eggs, and swine meat, fat, and byproducts.

International Harmonization

Sulfoxaflor is a new active ingredient and no maximum residue limits (MRLs) have yet been 

established by Canada, Mexico, or Australia. CODEX MRLs have been proposed by the 2011 

JMPR, see Table 2 below. The table shows the MRLs based on a Regional approach and a 

Global approach. The global partners in this joint review agreed to use global field trial data 

from other growing areas, in many cases from other continents to set MRLs. Therefore, the 

Agency is attempting to harmonize with the global MRLs.

The three countries participating in the joint review, the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have all 

agreed to use the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) tolerance 

calculation procedures to derive recommended tolerances/MRLs. As a result, for all 

commodities, the highest average field trial data from each field site were entered into the 

calculator. If one field site had data reflecting a second formulation or used different adjuvants, 

only the highest average residue value from the site was entered into the calculator. In general, 

for crop groups, the field trial data for the representative commodities were entered into the 

calculator and the highest recommended tolerance was selected for the entire crop group. In 

addition, the three countries are in agreement with respect to the residues of concern for 

tolerance enforcement. The residue of concern in plant and livestock commodities is parent 

sulfoxaflor only.

The tolerance calculated using the OECD tolerance calculation procedures for wheat straw is 

higher than the highest average field trial value for wheat straw (HAFT), but lower than the 

maximum residue observed in the wheat field trials. Since the CODEX Global MRL 

recommended by JMPR for wheat straw is 2.0 ppm, this value would be harmonized. In its 

evaluation, JMPR grouped bell and non-bell pepper data into one file, while EPA evaluates bell 

and non-bell peppers separately. The 0.7 ppm MRL recommended by JMPR is adequate since 

no pepper field trial residue exceeded this value. For Leafy Vegetables, harmonization with 

JMPR would result in individual commodity tolerance listings rather than a crop group tolerance

of 2.0 ppm (see Table 2). This harmonization issue was discussed with Registration Division risk 

managers and it was decided to follow the crop-group approach.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 10 of 141

Table 2. CODEX MRLs have been proposed by the 2011 JMPR and are pending approval by CCPR.

Crop/Crop Group

JMPR Recommendations Joint review OECD 

calculator recommended 

tolerance

EPA Recommended 

tolerance†

Current Practice 

(Regional Method)

Global Dataset 

Method

MRL (mg/kg) MRL (mg/kg) MRL (mg/kg) MRL (mg/kg)

Carrot No MRLa 0.05 0.05 0.05

Dry Bean No MRLa 0.2 0.2 0.2

Common Bean No MRLa 4 4.0 4.0

Citrus Fruit 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7

Pome Fruit 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5

Stone Fruit 3 3 3.0 3.0

Tree Nuts 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Fruiting Vegetables, Cucurbit 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4

Fruiting Vegetables, other than 

cucurbits (except sweet corn 

and mushroom)

1.5 0.7 0.9 0.7*

Leafy Vegetables 6 6 6 6

Root and Tuber Vegetablesb 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.05

Barley 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4

Barley straw and fodder, dry 3 2 2.0 2.0

Broccoli 3 2 2.0 2.0

Cabbages, Head 0.4 0.5 2.0 2.0**

Cauliflower 0.04 0.07 2.0 2.0**

Celery 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0**

Cotton seed 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2

Garlic 0.01 0.01 -- --

Grapes 2 2 2.0 2.0

Dried Grape 6 6 5.4 6.0

Okra 1.5 0.7 0.9 0.9

Onion, bulb 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

Spring onion 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7

Dried chili pepper 15 7 -- --

Pistachio nut 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Rape seed 0.15 0.4 0.4 0.4

Soya bean fodder 3 2 2.0 2.0

Soya bean (immature seed) 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 11 of 141

Crop/Crop Group

JMPR Recommendations Joint review OECD 

calculator recommended 

tolerance

EPA Recommended 

tolerance†

Current Practice 

(Regional Method)

Global Dataset 

Method

MRL (mg/kg) MRL (mg/kg) MRL (mg/kg) MRL (mg/kg)

Strawberry 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7

Triticale 0.2 0.151 0.08 0.08

Watercress 6 6 6 6

Wheat 0.2 0.151 0.08 0.08

Wheat straw and fodder, dry 3 2 2.0 2.0

Livestock Commodities 

Mammals, meat 0.3

NA

0.15 ppm for the meat of 

cattle, goat, horse, and 

sheep

Mammals, offal 0.6 0.40 ppm for the meat 

byproducts of cattle, 

goat, horse, and sheep,

0.10 ppm for the fat of 

cattle, goat, horse, and 

sheep,

Milk 0.2 0.15

Poultry, meat 0.1 Tolerances are being 

recommended at the 

LOQ level (0.01 ppm) 

for poultry meat, fat and 

eggs, 

Poultry, offal 0.3 0.01 ppm tolerance for 

poultry byproducts.

Eggs 0.1 0.01

† Where there were differences between the JMPR global recommended MRL and the OECD calculator result, EPA defaulted to the JMPR global value for the 

purpose of harmonization, unless otherwise noted.

a No recommendation due to insufficient number of trials.

*JMPR grouped the bell and non-bell pepper while EPA evaluated bell and non-bell peppers. 0.7 ppm is adequate since no residue exceeded this value.

**In order to harmonize with JMPR, we would not be able to set a crop group tolerance.

JMPR recommended that CCPR accept the MRLs based on the Global Dataset Method. MRLs based on current practice (Regional Dataset Method) were 

provided in the event that CCPR does not accept the Global Dataset Method. 

1. JMPR reviewer reevaluated this to be 0.08 ppm.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 12 of 141

The majority of the recommended MRLs are expected to be harmonized between Canada, and 

the U.S. It is not yet known what tolerances will be established by Australia. In the cases where 

MRLs are not being harmonized, it is because of policy differences in the way the two countries 

establish MRLs. Canada does not establish MRLs for animal feed items, whereas the U.S. does. 

On the other hand, the U.S. generally does not establish MRLs for livestock commodities when 

there is no reasonable expectation of finite residues, whereas Canada establishes LOQ tolerances 

in these situations (e.g., sulfoxaflor residues in swine).

The calculated tolerance for crop group 8 was 0.9 ppm; however, HED recommends for a 0.7 

ppm tolerance in order to harmonize with pending global CODEX MRL. This is due to JMPR 

combining all the bell pepper and non-bell pepper data vs. the US approach of evaluating the bell 

and non-bell pepper separately.

Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

Many of the proposed tolerances are different from those recommended by HED. The reason for 

the differences is that the registrant determined the proposed tolerances using the NAFTA 

(North American Free-Trade Agreement) tolerance calculator. In addition, the registrant 

proposed tolerances for some crops as both an individual crop and as members of a crop group. 

As stated above, the three countries participating in this joint review all agreed to use the OECD 

calculation procedures to determine the recommended MRLs. The registrant should submit a 

revised Section F in which the proposed tolerances are the same as those recommended by HED.

Residue Profile

Table 3. Sulfoxaflor Nomenclature

Compound Chemical Structure

Common name Sulfoxaflor

Company experimental names XDE-208

IUPAC name 1-(6-trifluoromethylpyridin-3-yl)ethyl](methyl)-oxido-λ6-

sulfanylidenecyanamide

CAS name cyanamide, N-[methyloxido[1-[6-(trifluoromethyl)-3-

pyridinyl]ethyl] λ4-sulfanylidene]

Molecular formula C10H10F3N3OS

CAS registry number 946578-00-3

End-use products (EP) GF-2032 SC, Transform WG
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 13 of 141

Figure 1. Structural formula 

CF3 N

S

O NCN

1

2

Sulfoxaflor isomers

Sulfoxaflor has two chiral centers (indicated by 1 and 2 in the structure above) and therefore 

contains a pair of diastereomers, designated A and B below, each of which is comprised of two 

enantiomers. Commercially available sulfoxaflor is considered to be present as an approximate 

1:1 mixture of the diastereomers. Diastereomers A (X11546257) and B (X11546258) have 

different HPLC retention times and are readily separated by conventional (non chiral) HPLC 

columns. Thus, two peaks for the test material are observed in the HPLC chromatograms; HPLC 

percentages of the two peaks are added together to calculate the total amount of sulfoxaflor. 

Figure 2. Sulfoxaflor isomers

The interconversion rate of the diastereoisomers is strongly pH dependent, with interconversion 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 14 of 141

equilibrium being reached in less than 1 hour, 3 days, and more than 100 days at pH 9, 7, and 5, 

respectively (186, Ma, 2010). At equilibrium, the diastereoisomer ratio is approximately 50:50, 

except at pH 5, where it is 70:30 (A:B).

Additionally, both (E)- and (Z)-isomers (involving the S=N double bond and the cyano group) 

exist, but they are thought to rapidly interconvert at ambient temperatures (A. Wood, 

Compendium of Common Pesticide Names).

Figure 3. (E)- and (Z)-isomer Interconversion

CF3 N

S

N

O

C N

CF3 N

S

N

O

C

N

E-Sulfoxaflor Z-Sulfoxaflor

Table 4. Physical Chemical Properties

Parameter Value

Melting point/range 112.9 oC

pH (24 oC) 5.82 (1.00% w/w aqueous solution)

Density (Technical grade @ 19.7 oC) 1.5378 g/cm3

Water solubility ( 20 °C) 99.7% pure active ingredient 

pH 5 1380 mg/L

pH 7 570 mg/L

pH 9 550 mg/L

Unbuffered 670 mg/L

Solvent solubility (g/L at 20 °C) technical grade material

Methanol 93.1

Acetone 217

p-Xylene 0.743

1,2-dichloroethane 39.6

ethyl acetate 95.2

n-heptane 0.000242

n-octanol 1.66

Vapor Pressure (pure active ingredient) 2.5 x 10-6 Pa (1.9 x 10-8 mm Hg) at 25°C 

1.4 x 10-6 Pa (1.1 x 10-8 mm Hg) at 20°C.

Dissociation constant (pKa) NA

Octanol/water partition coefficient Log(KOW)

Unbuffered NA

pH 5 logKO/W = 0.806

pH 7 logKO/W = 0.802

pH 9 logKO/W = 0.799

UV/visible absorption spectrum wavelength max absorption: 192, 211, and 

260 nm

N/A = not available 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 15 of 141

Residue Chemistry Guidelines

Directions for Use (860.1200)

Sulfoxaflor products are intended to be used as an insecticide in a wide variety of crops as well 

as turf grass and ornamentals. Sulfoxaflor is generally applied 1-4 times with retreatment 

intervals ranging from 5- to 14-days, depending on crop, pest, and country/region. The 

recommended application rates for agricultural crops range from 0.016–0.133 lb ai/A. A 

summary of the use directions is provided in Table 5.

These end-use products may be applied through a variety of application methods including 

aerial, chemigation, ground-boom sprayer, and air blast sprayer. The two proposed labels allow 

the use of adjuvants.

Rotational Crops/Greenhouse Uses - The proposed 30-day plant back interval is considered 

adequate, and HED notes that there are only a few commodities that are not proposed for 

registration (e.g., corn, peanut, pasture grasses) that could be rotational crop options.

Limited data were submitted for sulfoxaflor residues in greenhouse tomatoes. No greenhouse 

uses were requested with this submission. If greenhouse uses are requested in the future, 

additional data would be required.

Table 5. Summary of Proposed Directions for Use of Sulfoxaflor.

Applic. Timing, 

Type, and Equip.

Formulation Applic. 

Rate 

(lb ai/A)

Max. No. 

Applic. 

per 

Season

Max. Seasonal 

Applic. Rate

(lb ai/A)

[g ai/ha]

PHI

(days)

Use Directions and 

Limitations

Barley/Triticale/Wheat

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.012 -0.043 2 0.09 [101]

7 

(forage/fodder

/hay)

14

(grain/straw)

14-day retreatment 

interval.

Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 – 0.09 4 0.266 [298] 3 7-day retreatment interval.

Bulb Vegetables (Crop Group 3-07)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.09 3 0.266 [298] 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Canola (Rapeseed) Subgroup 20A

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.012 -0.043 2 0.09 [101] 14 14-day retreatment interval.

Citrus (Crop Group 10)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 -0.133 4 0.266 [298] 1 7-day retreatment interval.

Cotton

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.012 -0.09 4 0.266 [298] 14 5-day retreatment interval.

Cucurbit Vegetables (Crop Group 9)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation.

SC/WDG 0.023 -0.09 4 0.266 [298] 1 7-day retreatment interval.

Fruiting Vegetables (Crop Group 8)

Ground, air blast, aerial,

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.022 -0.09 4 0.266 [298] 1 7-day retreatment interval.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 16 of 141

Table 5. Summary of Proposed Directions for Use of Sulfoxaflor.

Applic. Timing, 

Type, and Equip.

Formulation Applic. 

Rate 

(lb ai/A)

Max. No. 

Applic. 

per 

Season

Max. Seasonal 

Applic. Rate

(lb ai/A)

[g ai/ha]

PHI

(days)

Use Directions and 

Limitations

Leafy Vegetables (except Brassica) Crop Group 4

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation.

SC/WDG 0.023 -0.09 4 0.266 [298] 3 7-day retreatment interval.

Leaves of Root and Tuber Vegetables (Crop Group 2)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 -0.09 4 0.266 [298] 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Pome Fruits (Crop Group 11)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 -0.09 4 0.266 (298) 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Root and Tuber Vegetables (Crop Group 1)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 – 0.09 4 0.266 [298] 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Small Fruit Vine Climbing, except Fuzzy Kiwifruit (Subgroup 13-07F)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.043 –0.09 4 0.266 [298] 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Low Growing Berry (Subgroup 13-07G)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.043 –0.09 4 0.266 [298] 1 7-day retreatment interval.

Soybean

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 –

0.09 4* 0.266 [298]

7 (grain, 

forage, and 

 hay) 7-day retreatment interval.

Stone Fruit (Crop Group 12)

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 –0.133 4 0.266 [298] 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Succulent, Edible Podded, and Dry Beans

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.023 –0.09 4 0.266 [298] 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Tree Nuts

Ground, air blast, aerial, 

and chemigation. SC/WDG 0.022 –0.133 4 0.266 [298] 7 7-day retreatment interval.

Turf grass/ Ornamentals

Ground and chemigation. 

Aerial for ornamentals 

only.

SC/WDG 0.043 –

0.133

Not 

specified 0.266 [298] NA 7-day retreatment interval. Greenhouse use.

*The residue data support two applications for soybean forage.

Conclusions: The proposed use directions are sufficient to allow evaluation of the metabolism 

and residue studies. The labels must be revised to reflect that only two applications can be made

to soybean forage, which corresponds to the residue data for this commodity.

That use pattern for the submitted field trials are in accord with the proposed critical good 

agricultural practice (cGAP), which is 400 g a.i./ha for most commodities, higher than the use 

rates proposed for the US.

Nature of the Residue (860.1300)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7: Residue data

ROCKS Decision Memo Reference

Plants

The metabolism of sulfoxaflor was investigated in four different plants, i.e., tomato, lettuce, 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 17 of 141

succulent pea, and rice. For each metabolism study, foliar and soil application were studied 

separately, although only foliar uses are being proposed.

Tomato

14C-Sulfoxaflor was applied to tomatoes (commercial variety 9557) by foliar and soil 

application. For the foliar application, 4 treatments at 213, 202, 129, and 74 g a.i./ha were 

applied at 30, 18, and 17 day re-treatment intervals, respectively, for a total rate of 618 g a.i./ha. 

Immature plants were collected 14 days after the first application, and 14 days after the second 

application. Ripe tomatoes, displaying a red color-break, were harvested at 1-, 7-, and 14-day 

PHIs. Mature vines were collected 14 day after the last application.

Immature plants collected 14 days after the first and second foliar applications contained 0.578 

and 0.799 ppm of total radioactive residues (TRRs), respectively (Table 6). Ripe tomatoes 

harvested at 1-, 7-, and 14-day PHIs contained 0.038, 0.033, and 0.030 ppm of TRRs, 

respectively, and mature vines collected at a 14-day PHI contained 1.344 ppm TRRs. Over 84 % 

of the TRRs were extractable. The major residues in all tomatoes matrices were sulfoxaflor 

(12.8-33.3 % TRR; 0.009-0.384 ppm) and X11719474 (15.5-27.3 % TRR; 0.006-0.208 ppm). 

Immature plants collected 14 days after the first foliar application, ripe tomatoes, and mature 

vines also contained the glucose plus malonyl conjugate of X11721061 (8.9-13.3 % TRR; 0.004-

0.120 ppm). 

Immature plants collected 14 days after the first soil application contained 0.836 ppm of TRRs. 

Ripe tomatoes harvested at 14-, 21-, and 28-day PHIs contained 0.023, 0.026, and 0.029 ppm of 

TRRs, respectively, and mature vines collected at a 28-day PHI contained 2.790 ppm of TRRs. 

Over 91 % of the TRRs were extractable. In all tomato matrices except vines, the major residue

(>10% TRR) was sulfoxaflor (11.5-17.2 % TRR; 0.003-0.109 ppm) and in all matrices 

X11719474 (16.0-73.1 % TRR, 0.016-0.445 ppm) was a major residue. The glucose conjugate of 

X11721061 was also observed (1.4-4.3 % TRR; <0.001-0.038 ppm) in all matrices. The glucose 

plus malonyl conjugate was observed in all matrices (3.5-9.7 % TRR; <0.001-0.157 ppm) except 

for ripe tomatoes at the 21-day PHI where it was not detected. X11721061 was only observed in 

mature vines (2.3 % TRR; 0.064 ppm). Post-extracted solids from vines indicated incorporation 

of radioactivity into lignin (8.1% TRR, 0.226 ppm). Table 6 summarizes the reported results for

foliar applications to tomatoes.

For the soil application, 2 treatments at 249 and 211 g a.i./ha were applied, for a total rate of 460 

g a.i./ha, with a 28-day retreatment interval. Soil treatments were made by application of the test 

substance with a pipet into four shallow furrows on each side of the plant that were back-filled 

once the solution was absorbed. Tomato plants were collected 14 days after the first application. 

Ripe tomatoes were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days after the second treatment. Mature vines 

were collected 28 days after the last application.

After two soil applications, the primary residue in the mature fruit (14-28 day PHIs) was 

metabolite X11719474, at 59-73% of the TRR, while parent was present at 12-17% TRR. Minor 

metabolites in ripe tomatoes were the glucose and the glucose plus malonyl conjugates of 

X11721061, both at about 4% TRR. No free X11721061 was found in any matrix except for 

mature vines (2% TRR). Similar residue distributions were noted for immature plants and 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 18 of 141

mature vines, but with higher total residue levels, and lower relative levels of X11719474. 

Overall, similar results were obtained from foliar and soil application methods. Table 7

summarizes the reported results for soil applications to tomatoes.

The metabolism of sulfoxaflor in tomatoes proceeds through oxidation of the cyano-carbon to 

X11719474, and the loss of the sulphur side-chain to produce X11721061. X11721061 is then 

conjugated with glucose, which in turn may become conjugated with malonic acid. Metabolism 

continues through natural incorporation of the radiolabeled carbon into natural plant constituents, 

such as lignin.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 19 of 141

Table 6. Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Plant Matrices Following Foliar Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 618 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature plant, 14 

days after 1st

treatment

Immature plant, 14 days 

after 2nd treatment

Ripe tomato, 1 days PHI Ripe tomato, 7 days PHI Ripe tomato, 14 days 

PHI

Vines, 14 days PHI

TRRs = 0.578 ppm TRRs = 0.799 ppm TRRs = 0.038 ppm TRRs = 0.033 ppm TRRs = 0.030 ppm TRRs = 1.344 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm

Sulfoxaflor 12.8 0.074 25.2 0.201 31.6 0.012 27.3 0.009 33.3 0.010 28.6 0.384

X11719474 16.1 0.093 17.5 0.140 23.7 0.009 27.3 0.009 20.0 0.006 15.5 0.208

Glucose conjugate of 

X11721061

3.5 0.020 4.1 0.033 2.6 0.001 9.1 0.003 3.3 0.001 3.8 0.051

Glucose plus malonyl 

conjugate of 

X11721061

10.9 0.063 8.6 0.069 10.5 0.004 12.1 0.004 13.3 0.004 8.9 0.120

X11721061 3.1 0.018 2.5 0.020 nd nd nd nd nd nd 2.2 0.030

Total identified 46.4 0.268 58.0 0.463 68.4 0.026 75.8 0.025 70.0 0.021 59.0 0.793

Total characterized 43.1 0.249 30.0 0.240 15.8 0.006 15.2 0.005 26.7 0.008 32.5 0.437

Total extractable 89.5 0.517 88.0 0.703 84.2 0.032 90.9 0.03 96.7 0.029 91.5 1.230

Unextractable (PES)1 10.0 0.058 18.4 0.147 5.3 0.002 6.1 0.002 6.7 0.002 8.2 0.110

Accountability2 99.5 106 89.5 97.0 103 99.7 1 Residues remaining after various solvent extractions. 2 Accountability = (Total extractable + Total unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100.

Table 7. Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Plant Matrices Following Soil Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 460 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature plant, 14 days after 

treatment

Ripe tomato, 14 days PHI Ripe tomato, 21 days PHI Ripe tomato, 28 days PHI Vines, 28 days PHI

TRRs = 0.836 ppm TRRs = 0.023 ppm TRRs = 0.026 ppm TRRs = 0.029 ppm TRRs = 2.790 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm

Sulfoxaflor 13.0 0.109 13.0 0.003 11.5 0.003 17.2 0.005 3.6 0.100

X11719474 27.5 0.230 69.5 0.016 73.1 0.019 58.6 0.017 16.0 0.445

Glucose conjugate of 

X11721061

3.7 0.031 4.3 <0.001 3.9 0.001 3.5 0.001 1.4 0.038

Glucose plus malonyl 

conjugate of 

X11721061

9.7 0.081 4.3 <0.001 nd nd 3.5 0.001 5.6 0.157

X11721061 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 2.3 0.064

Total identified 54.0 0.451 91.3 0.021 88.5 0.023 82.8 0.024 28.8 0.804

Total characterized 37.8 0.316 21.7 0.005 11.6 0.003 17.2 0.005 68.2 1.903

Total extractable 91.8 0.767 113 0.026 100 0.026 100 0.029 97.0 2.707

Unextractable (PES)1 18.8 0.157 4.4 0.001 3.9 0.001 6.9 0.002 0.5 0.014

Accountability2 111 117 104 107 97.5 1 Residues remaining after various solvent extractions, except for mature vines where residues remaining are after bound residue determination. 2 Accountability = (Total extractable + Total 

unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 20 of 141

Lettuce

Two studies, one with foliar application and the second using soil application, were 

conducted to investigate the nature of residue in lettuce. Lettuce plants were grown outside 

using standard agricultural practices. The 14C-sulfoxaflor was applied to lettuce (Envy) by 

foliar application consisting of 3 applications at 195, 199, and 205 g a.i./ha at 21-day 

retreatment intervals using a hand-held sprayer, for a total rate of 599 g a.i./ha. The first 

application occurred 28 days after transplanting. Immature plants were collected 14 days 

after the first and second applications. Mature lettuce was harvested at a 7-day PHI.

Following three foliar applications of sulfoxaflor, major residues include sulfoxaflor (17% 

TRR), and metabolite X11719474 (27-31% TRR). The glucose conjugate of X11721061 (3-

5% TRR) and the glucose plus malonyl conjugate of X11721061 (6% TRR) were found at 

lower levels. Very low levels of free X11721061, X11579457, and X11519540 (each < 1% 

TRR) were also reported. Table 8 summarizes the metabolites identified and their 

concentrations in lettuce samples that were treated with sulfoxaflor using foliar applications.

Table 8. Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Lettuce Plants

 Following Foliar Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 599 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature Lettuce, 14 d after 1st treatment Mature Lettuce, 7 day PHI

TRRs = 0.182 ppm TRRs = 4.393 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm

Sulfoxaflor 17.0 0.031 16.6 0.730

X11719474 26.9 0.049 30.9 1.355

Glucose conjugate of 

X11721061

5.0 0.009 2.7 0.119

Glucose plus malonyl 

conjugate of X11721061

6.0 0.011 5.5 0.241

X11721061 <0.6 <0.001 0.9 0.041

X11579457 <0.6 <0.001 0.2 0.009

X11519540 Nd Nd 0.6 0.028

Others 25.8 0.047 28.1 1.232

Total identified 56.0 0.102 57.3 2.523

Total characterized 34.6 0.063 42.5 1.869

Total extractable (Table 

6.1.1/1-5)

90.7 0.165 100 4.392

Unextractable (PES)1 9.3 0.017 0.05 0.002

Accountability2 100 100

1. Residues remaining after various solvent extractions.

2. Accountability = (Total extractable + Total unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100. nd: not detected

For the soil treatments, 2 applications at 238 and 216 g a.i./ha were made, for a total rate of 

454 g a.i./ha. The first application occurred 5 days after transplanting, and the second 

application was 28 days after the first. Soil treatments were made by application of the test 

substance with a pipet into four shallow furrows on each side of the plant that were backfilled once the solution was absorbed. Immature lettuce was collected 14 days after the first 

application. Mature lettuce was collected 14 days after the second application.

For soil application of sulfoxaflor, X11719474 was the only major metabolite in lettuce, 

comprising 49-60% of the TRR. Glucose and glucose plus malonyl conjugates of 

X11721061 were found at ≤4% TRR. Sulfoxaflor, X11721061, X11579457, and X11519540 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 21 of 141

were each present at ≤1% TRR. Table 9 summarizes the metabolites identified and their 

concentrations in lettuce samples that were treated with sulfoxaflor using soil applications.

Table 9. Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Lettuce Plants

Following Soil Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 454 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature Lettuce, 14 days after 1st 

treatment

Mature Lettuce, 14 days after 

last treatment

TRRs = 0.135 ppm TRRs = 1.411 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm

Sulfoxaflor nd nd 1.0 0.014

X11719474 60.0 0.081 49.0 0.691

Glucose conjugate of X11721061 4.4 0.006 1.3 0.018

Glucose plus malonyl conjugate of X11721061 3.0 0.004 3.8 0.054

X11721061 0.7 <0.001 1.0 0.014

X11579457 nd nd 0.2 0.003

X11519540 nd nd 0.1 0.002

Others 18.5 0.025 26.5 0.374

Total identified 68.2 0.092 56.4 0.796

Total characterized 23.7 0.032 43.4 0.613

Total extractable (Table 6.1.1/1-5) 91.9 0.124 99.9 1.409

Unextractable (PES)1 8.2 0.011 0.07 0.001

Accountability1 100 99.9

1. Accountability = (Total extractable + Total unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100.nd: not detected.

Succulent Peas

Two studies were conducted to investigate the nature of residue in succulent peas: one with

three foliar applications of radiolabeled sulfoxaflor to pea plants and a separate study 

consisting of two soil applications of radiolabeled sulfoxaflor near growing pea plants. Pea 

plants were grown outside using standard agricultural practices. The 14C-sulfoxaflor was 

applied to pea (Sugar Ann) via foliar application consisting of three treatments at 197, 201, 

and 203 g a.i./ha at 14- and 28-day retreatment intervals using a hand-held sprayer, for a total 

rate of 601 g a.i./ha. The first application occurred 41 days after planting. Immature plants

were collected 14 days after the first and second applications. Mature pods and vines were 

harvested at a 14-day PHI.

Following three foliar applications of sulfoxaflor, significant residues of parent sulfoxaflor 

(59-71% TRR), and X11719474 (12-13% TRR) were found in mature pea pods and vines. 

The glucose conjugate of X11721061 (7-10% TRR) and the glucose plus malonyl conjugate 

of X11721061 (1-3% TRR) were found at lower levels, and free X11711061 was only found 

at 1% TRR in mature pea matrices. The immature pea plants demonstrated lower overall 

residue levels, together with relatively more of the glucose conjugate of X11721061 than 

found in the mature pea plants. Table 10 summarizes the metabolites identified and their 

concentrations in pea plants that were treated with sulfoxaflor using foliar applications.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 22 of 141

Table 10: Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Pea 

Plants Following Foliar Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 601 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature Plants, 14 

days after 1st treatment

Immature Plants, 14 

days after 2nd

treatment

Mature Pea Pods, 

14 days after last 

treatment

Mature Pea Vines, 

14 days after last 

treatment

TRRs = 0.348 ppm TRRs = 0.592 ppm TRRs = 1.046 ppm TRRs = 5.478 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm

Sulfoxaflor 34.5 0.120 30.4 0.180 59.4 0.621 71.2 3.898

X11719474 30.5 0.106 31.9 0.189 13.3 0.139 11.7 0.639

Glucose conjugate of 

X11721061

22.1 0.077 18.1 0.107 10.1 0.106 6.7 0.365

Glucose plus malonyl 

conjugate of 

X11721061

0.6 0.002 0.9 0.005 2.9 0.030 1.2 0.067

X11721061 nd nd 1.5 0.009 0.8 0.008 1.4 0.078

Total identified 87.6 0.305 82.8 0.490 86.4 0.904 92.1 5.047

Total characterized 11.5 0.037 10.0 0.059 4.9 0.051 9.3 0.507

Total extractable 99.1 0.342 92.7 0.549 91.3 0.955 101 5.554

Unextractable (PES)1 0.9 0.003 1.7 0.010 1.5 0.016 1.7 0.092

Accountability2 99.1 94.4 92.8 103

1

 Residues remaining after various solvent extractions. 2 Accountability = (Total extractable + Total unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100.

For the soil application, 2 treatments at 212 and 222 g a.i./ha were applied, for a total rate of 

434 g a.i./ha. The first application occurred 55 days after planting, and the second 

application was 28 days after the first. Soil treatments were made by application of the test 

substance with a pipet into four shallow furrows on each side of the plant that were backfilled once the solution was absorbed. Immature pea plants were collected 14 days after the 

first application. Mature pods and vines were collected 14 days after the second soil 

application.

For soil application of sulfoxaflor, the primary residue in mature pods and vines was 

metabolite X11719474 (88-90% TRR). Parent sulfoxaflor (nd-5% TRR) and the glucose 

conjugate of X11721061 (2-8% TRR) were minor metabolites in the mature pea plants. Soil 

treatments resulted in significantly lower overall residue levels in pea plants than foliar 

applications. Table 11 summarizes the metabolites identified and their concentrations in 

lettuce samples that were treated with sulfoxaflor using soil applications.

Table 11: Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in 

Pea Plant Matrices Following Soil Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 434 g 

a.i./ha.

Compound Immature Plants, 14 

days after 1st treatment

Mature Pea Pods, 14 

days after last 

treatment

Mature Pea Vines, 14 

days after last 

treatment

TRRs = 0.036 ppm TRRs = 0.042 ppm TRRs = 0.146 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm

Sulfoxaflor 13.9 0.005 4.8 0.002 nd nd

X11719474 83.3 0.030 88.1 0.037 89.7 0.131

Glucose conjugate of 

X11721061

11.1 0.004 2.4 0.001 7.5 0.011

Glucose plus malonyl 

conjugate of 

X11721061

nd nd nd nd nd nd
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 23 of 141

Table 11: Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in 

Pea Plant Matrices Following Soil Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 434 g 

a.i./ha.

Compound Immature Plants, 14 

days after 1st treatment

Mature Pea Pods, 14 

days after last 

treatment

Mature Pea Vines, 14 

days after last 

treatment

TRRs = 0.036 ppm TRRs = 0.042 ppm TRRs = 0.146 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm

X11721061 nd nd nd nd nd nd

Total identified 108 0.039 95.2 0.040 97.3 0.142

Total characterized 8.3 0.003 11.9 0.005 4.8 0.007

Total extractable 117 0.042 107 0.045 102 0.149

Unextractable (PES) 2.8 0.001 2.4 0.001 1.4 0.002

Accountability1 119 110 103

1 Accountability = (Total extractable + Total unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100.

Rice 

Two studies were conducted to investigate the nature of residue in rice: one with three foliar 

applications of radiolabeled sulfoxaflor to rice plants and a separate study consisting of one 

soil application of radiolabeled sulfoxaflor near growing rice plants. Rice plants were grown 

outside using standard agricultural practices. The 14C-sulfoxaflor was applied to rice plants

(Japonica) by foliar application consisting of 3 treatments at 227, 205, and 145 g a.i./ha at 49-

and 28-day retreatment intervals using a hand-held sprayer, for a total rate of 578 g a.i./ha. 

The first application occurred 41 days after planting. Immature plants were collected 14 days 

after the first application. Grain and straw were separated, and mature grain was separated 

into white rice and hulls.

Following three foliar applications of sulfoxaflor, parent sulfoxaflor was the major 

metabolite in mature rice matrices (33-44% TRR). Metabolite X11719474 was found at 

lower levels (7-10% TRR), as was the glucose conjugate of X11721061 (5-11% TRR). Free 

X11721061 (2-4% TRR) was also found in the mature rice matrices. The immature rice 

plants contained mostly parent sulfoxaflor (74% TRR) and correspondingly lower levels of 

metabolites. The glucose plus malonyl conjugate of X11721061 was only detected in mature 

rice straw (3% TRR). Table 12 summarizes the metabolites identified and their 

concentrations in rice plants that were treated with sulfoxaflor using foliar applications.

Table 12: Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Rice

Matrices Following Foliar Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 578 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature plant, 14 

days after treatment

Mature Straw Mature Hulls Mature White 

Rice

TRRs = 2.841 ppm TRRs = 5.627 ppm TRRs = 3.669 ppm TRRs = 0.243 

ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % 

TRR

ppm

Sulfoxaflor 73.7 2.095 43.9 2.472 33.4 1.226 35.4 0.086

X11719474 7.4 0.210 9.7 0.547 7.3 0.267 8.6 0.021

Glucose conjugate 

of X11721061

2.1 0.059 5.4 0.301 7.0 0.256 11.1 0.027

Glucose plus 

malonyl conjugate 

of X11721061

nd nd 2.9 0.164 nd nd nd nd
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 24 of 141

Table 12: Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Rice

Matrices Following Foliar Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 578 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature plant, 14 

days after treatment

Mature Straw Mature Hulls Mature White 

Rice

TRRs = 2.841 ppm TRRs = 5.627 ppm TRRs = 3.669 ppm TRRs = 0.243 

ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % 

TRR

ppm

X11721061 5.7 0.161 4.1 0.231 2.0 0.075 2.1 0.005

Total identified 88.9 2.525 66.0 3.715 49.7 1.824 57.2 0.139

Total characterized 11.9 0.338 33.6 1.892 39.4 1.444 41.6 0.101

Total extractable 101 2.863 99.7 5.607 89.1 3.268 98.8 0.240

Unextractable 

(PES)1

8.7 0.246 2.5 0.143 1.6 0.058 10.7 0.026

Accountability2 109 102 90.7 110

1 Residues remaining after various solvent extractions. 2 Accountability = (Total extractable + Total unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100.

For the soil application, 1 treatment at 474 g a.i./ha was applied at transplant. Soil treatment 

was made by application of the test substance with a pipet into holes. Once the solution was 

absorbed, rice plants at the 3-4 leaf stage were placed into the holes. Following this, the 

plants were flooded. Immature rice plants were collected 14 and 28 days after the soil 

application. Mature rice was collected 138 days after the soil application. Grain and straw 

were separated, and mature grain was separated into white rice and hulls.

After one soil application of sulfoxaflor, the major residue in the mature rice matrices was 

metabolite X11719474 (31-40% TRR). No other metabolites were reported in white rice 

grain, and relatively low levels of metabolite X11721061 (5-6% TRR) and its glucose 

conjugate (5-6% TRR) occurred in mature rice hulls and straw. Similar residue distributions 

were reported in immature rice plants, although higher overall residue levels were obtained. 

Additionally, low levels of the metabolite X11821639 (≤1% TRR) was reported in immature 

rice plants. Table 13 summarizes the metabolites identified and their concentrations in rice 

samples that were treated with sulfoxaflor using soil applications.

Table 13. Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Rice 

Matrices Following Soil Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 474 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature plant, 14 

days after treatment

Mature Straw Mature Hulls Mature White 

Rice

TRRs = 12.51 ppm TRRs = 1.794 ppm TRRs = 0.489 ppm TRRs = 0.049 

ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % 

TRR

ppm

Sulfoxaflor 3.7 0.463 nd nd nd nd nd nd

X11719474 55.5 6.948 31.1 0.558 40.3 0.197 36.7 0.018

Glucose conjugate 

of X11721061

5.5 0.687 5.5 0.098 4.9 0.024 nd nd

Glucose plus 

malonyl conjugate 

of X11721061

1.8 0.221 nd nd nd nd nd nd

X11721061 1.8 0.229 6.3 0.113 5.3 0.026 <2.0 <0.001

Total identified 68.3 8.548 42.9 0.769 50.5 0.247 38.8 0.019

Total characterized 20.8 2.597 44.9 0.805 39.9 0.195 46.9 0.023

Total extractable 89.1 11.145 87.7 1.574 90.4 0.442 85.7 0.042
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 25 of 141

Table 13. Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Rice 

Matrices Following Soil Application of Radiolabeled Sulfoxaflor at 474 g a.i./ha.

Compound Immature plant, 14 

days after treatment

Mature Straw Mature Hulls Mature White 

Rice

TRRs = 12.51 ppm TRRs = 1.794 ppm TRRs = 0.489 ppm TRRs = 0.049 

ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % 

TRR

ppm

Unextractable 

(PES)1

11.5 1.435 12.7 0.227 4.1 0.020 16.3 0.008

Accountability2 101 100 94.5 102

1 Residues remaining after various solvent extractions, except for mature straw and hulls where residues

 remaining reflect the bound residue determination. 2 Accountability = (Total extractable + Total unextractable)/(TRRs from combustion analysis) * 100.

Conclusions: Metabolism of sulfoxaflor was similar in all four crops: oxidation of the 

cyano-carbon bond to form X11719474 and loss of the sulfur side chain to form X11721061. 

X117211061 is then conjugated with glucose, which may then be conjugated with malonic 

acid. Metabolism continues through natural incorporation of the radiolabeled carbon into 

natural plant constituents, such as lignin and starch. A very minor pathway (<1%) included 

degradation of the X11719474 urea side chain to form X1159540 and X11479457, which are 

further reduced to give X11721061. The primary difference noted between the foliar and soil 

metabolism studies was that parent sulfoxaflor was the predominant residue found from 

foliar applications, while X11719474 was the major residue found in soil application 

metabolism studies. Figure 4 presents the proposed metabolic profile of sulfoxaflor in plants. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 26 of 141

Figure 4. Proposed metabolic pathway of sulfoxaflor in plants.

Livestock Metabolism

Metabolism of sulfoxaflor (XDE-208), and the plant and soil metabolite X11719474, have 

been studied in both ruminants and poultry. The animals were orally dosed at levels 

equivalent to 12-14 mg/kg dry feed in the diet for periods of either 5 (goats) or 7 (hens) 

consecutive days with radiolabeled test materials. The anticipated dietary burdens for 

sulfoxaflor are 2.3 ppm for dairy cows and 0.056 ppm for hens.

N

S

N O

N

O

F

F

F

X11719474

N

OH

F

F

F

X11721061

Natural incorporation

glucose conjugate (X11863595)

and

glucose plus malonyl conjugate 

(X11889781)

N

S

N

F O N

F

F

XDE-208
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 27 of 141

For goats dosed with XDE-208, residue levels were highest in liver, kidney, muscle, and 

milk, and lower in fat. Total residue levels in the eggs and edible tissues from hens dosed 

with XDE-208 were lower than the levels observed in the ruminant. Residues in milk and 

eggs appeared to have reached a plateau during dosing. The livestock metabolism studies 

suggest rapid absorption and elimination of the 14C-XDE-208. The parent and/or metabolites 

were not observed to accumulate in fatty tissues. The majority of the residue in milk, eggs, 

and edible tissues consisted of the parent compound, generally >80% of the residue except in 

liver. Approximately 60% of the ruminant liver residue was identified as XDE-208 while 

18% was identified as X11596066 (68% of the hen liver residue was identified as XDE-208 

while 14% was identified as X11596066, which is consistent with the rat metabolism study). 

X11719540 was detected at low levels in most of the edible samples (<2% of the TRR in the 

ruminant or ca. 8% of the TRR in the hens) and X11721061 was detected in the ruminant 

liver (3.3% of the TRR). No other component was detected at levels greater than 10% of the 

total radioactive residue level. The metabolic pathway is qualitatively similar in rats.

 Figure 5. The metabolic pathway of XDE-208 in animals is shown below.

N

S

N

F O N

F

F

XDE-208

N

S

O

F O

F

F

X11519540

N

OH

F

F

F

X11721061
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 28 of 141

N

F

F

F

X11596066

Since X11719474 was observed as a plant metabolite, yet was not detected in either the 

ruminant or poultry metabolism studies, separate animal metabolism studies were conducted 

with 14C-X11719474. Residues of X11719474, like XDE-208, also did not accumulate in 

fatty tissues, with almost 35% of the administered dose recovered in the goat urine and 4% in 

the feces. No metabolism of X11719474 was observed in animals, with generally greater 

than 90% of the residue in edible samples identified as X11719474. The major residue in 

animals fed with parent 14C-XDE-208 or 14C-X11719474 was found to be the unchanged 

XDE-208 or X11719474 (not from the parent). X11596066 was found at trace levels only in 

liver.

Poultry Metabolism (Laying Hens)

Laying hens were dosed with 12.2 mg/kg dry feed (10.9 mg/kg fresh feed) of 14C-XDE-208. 

The XDE-208 dietary burden for poultry was estimated, by the registrant, to be 0.7 mg/kg 

(there was one very high canola sample, assessed as an outlier, among other factors). HED 

estimates the dietary burden to be 0.056 ppm for the parent and 0.01 ppm for the X11719474 

metabolite.

The majority of the recovered radioactivity was eliminated in the excreta and cage rinse, 

accounting for 37.1% and 5.5 % of the administered dose, respectively. The tissue with the 

lowest residue was fat (0.011 % dose, 0.025 ppm). Skin with subcutaneous fat contained 

0.036 ppm (0.047 % dose), leg muscle 0.059 ppm (0.14 % dose), breast muscle 0.062 ppm 

(0.13 % dose), and liver 0.139 ppm (0.065 % dose). The TRRs in excreta appear to have 

reached a peak at day 5 (5.378 ppm, 12.5 % dose). Low levels of radioactivity were detected 

in eggs, which peaked at day 6. A total of 0.14% of the administered dose was recovered in 

the eggs. The total recovery of radioactivity in the study was 43.1% of the administered dose. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 29 of 141

Table 14. Distribution of the Radioactive Residue in Laying Hens Matrices Dosed with 14Csulfoxaflor (normalized).

Metabolite 

Fraction

Muscle

Leg

Muscle

Breast

Liver Skin and 

Subcutaneous 

Fat

Fat Excreta (Day 6)

TRR=0.059 ppm TRR=0.062 ppm TRR=0.139 ppm TRR=0.036 ppm TRR= 0.025 ppm TRR=4.425 ppm

% 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm

Hexane 

Extract

nx nx nx nx nx nx 13.9 0.005 48.0 0.012 nx nx

ACN/H2O

Extract

98.3 0.058 95.2 0.059 110 0.153 86.1 0.031 60.0 0.015 128 5.672

Sulfoxaflor 94.9 0.056 90.3 0.056 67.6 0.094 83.3 0.030 92.0 0.023 125 5.530

X11519540 1.7 0.001 3.2 0.002 3.6 0.005 nd nd 8.0 0.002 nd nd

X11596066 nd nd nd nd 14.4 0.020 nd nd nd nd nd nd

Unidentified 

Peaks

3.4 0.002 6.5 0.004 13.0 0.018 16.7 0.006 4.0 <0.001 nd nd

Post 

Extraction 

Solids (PES)

1.7 <0.001 1.6 0.001 7.2 0.010 2.8 0.001 4.0 <0.001 2.2 0.097

nx: not extracted; nd: not detectable 

LAYING HENS (DOSED WITH 14C-X11719474) 

The target dose rate was 10 mg/kg feed based on the average feed consumption during the 

acclimation period, however, the hens consumed less than expected, resulting in an actual 

dose of 11.8 mg/kg for the 14C-X11719474 dosed animals. The dose rate was equivalent to 

13.3 mg/kg dry feed, ca. a 1300X feed rate when compared to the estimated dietary burden 

(0.01 mg/kg in feed).

The majority of the recovered dose, 92%, was excreted with 94% of the dose was recovered 

from the 14C-X11719474 dosed animals. Blood and the remaining carcasses were not 

evaluated. Overall, absorption and elimination of the 14C-X11719474 was rapid.

For egg, muscle, liver, skin with fat, and fat, the extractable TRRs were >94%. Over 7 days 

of dosing, 93% of the applied dose was eliminated in feces and 0.27 % in cage washes.

In eggs, the TRRs plateau at 0.275 ppm by day 4. The major residue in eggs on day 6 was 

X11719474 (101 % TRR, 0.281ppm). The TRRs in muscle were 0.243 and 0.258 ppm in leg 

and breast, respectively, and the major residue was X11719474 (98.5-101% TRR; 0.245-

0.254 ppm). The major residue was also X11719474 in liver (96.2 % TRR; 0.277 ppm), in 

skin plus subcutaneous fat (104% TRR; 0.099 ppm), and in fat (86.5% TRR; 0.032 ppm). 

Residue levels are summarized in Tables 15 and 16.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 30 of 141

Table 15: Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Hen 

Matrices when Dosed with 14C-X11719474.

Compound

Muscle

Leg

Muscle

Breast

Liver Skin with Subcutaneous 

Fat

Fat

TRR=0.243 

ppm

TRR=0.258 ppm TRR=0.288 ppm TRR=0.095 ppm TRR=0.037 ppm

% 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR

ppm

X11719474 101 0.245 98.5 0.254 96.2 0.277 104 0.099 86.5 0.032

Unidentified - - 1.6 0.004 3.8 0.011 - - 13.5 0.005

Total Identified 101 0.245 98.5 0.254 96.2 0.277 104 0.099 86.5 0.032

Total 

Characterized

- - 1.6 0.004 3.8 0.011 2.1 0.002 8.1 0.003

Total Extracted 101 0.245 98.5 0.254 96.2 0.277 106 0.101 94.6 0.035

Unextractable 

PES

1.2 0.003 1.6 0.004 0.4 0.001 2.1 0.002 5.4 0.002

Accountability 102 100 96.5 108 100

Table 16: Summary of Characterization and Identification of 

Radioactive Residues in Eggs from Laying Hens when Dosed with

14C-X11719474.

Compound

Egg 

(Day 1)

Egg

(Day 6)

Egg

(Day 7)

TRR=0.151 ppm TRR=0.278 ppm TRR=0.274 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm

X11719474 101 0.153 101 0.281 103 0.283

Unidentified - - 0.7 0.002 - -

Total Identified 101 0.153 101 0.281 103 0.283

Total 

Characterized

1 - 0.7 0.002 - -

Total Extracted 101 0.153 98.9 0.275 103 0.282

Unextractable PES 2.7 0.004 1.4 0.004 1.5 0.004

Accountability 104 100 104

Figure 6. Proposed Metabolic Profile of X11719474 in Laying Hens

N

S

N O

F3C

NH2

O

Not Metabolized

N

S

N O

F3C

NH2

O

Not Metabolized
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 31 of 141

Lactating Goat Metabolism

14C-Sulfoxaflor was administered orally to one lactating goat (LaMancha) at a nominal dose 

level of 10 mg/kg bw/day for 5 days following a 12 day acclimation period. The actual dose 

administered, based on food consumption during the study period, was 12.2 ppm. The 

estimated dairy cow dietary burden is 2.27 ppm for sulfoxaflor and1.4 ppm for the 

X11719474 metabolite.

Milk and urine were collected twice a day, and feces were collected daily just prior to dose 

administration. Sacrifice occurred 6 hours after administration of the last dose. Muscle (loin 

and flank), liver, kidney, fat (subcutaneous, omental, renal), and the gastrointestinal tract 

with contents were collected. The TRR levels were determined in milk and urine by LSC, in 

fat by heat solubilization followed by LSC, and in tissues and feces by oxidative combustion. 

For milk, muscle, liver, kidney, and fat, the extractable TRRs were ≥96 %. Over 5 days of 

dosing, 41.0 % of the applied dose was eliminated in urine and 13.3 % in feces. 

In milk, the TRRs had peaked at 0.224 ppm by day 4. The major residue in milk on day 4 

was sulfoxaflor (94.2 % TRR; 0.211 ppm). The TRRs in muscle were 0.197 and 0.205 ppm 

in loin and flank, respectively, and the major residue was sulfoxaflor (96.1-97.0 % TRR; 

0.191-0.197 ppm). For liver, the TRR was 0.518 ppm, and the major residues were 

sulfoxaflor (60.4 % TRR; 0.313 ppm), and X11596066 (18.3 % TRR; 0.095 ppm). The TRRs 

in kidney and fat were 0.435 ppm and 0.074-0.088 ppm, respectively, and the major residue 

was also sulfoxaflor in kidney (89.0 % TRR; 0.387 ppm) and fat (94.3-97.3 % TRR; 0.070-

0.083 ppm). 

The major residue in all goat matrices was sulfoxaflor (60.4-97.3 % TRR, 0.070-0.387 ppm). 

Muscle had no other identifiable radioactive residues. The metabolite X11519540 was 

identified in milk (~ 1% TRR, 0.002 ppm), liver (1.7 % TRR, 0.009 ppm), kidney (1.2% 

TRR, 0.005 ppm), and fat (<1.1-1.4 % TRRs, <0.001 ppm). Metabolites X11721061 (3.3% 

TRR, 0.017 ppm) and X11596066 (18.3% TRR, 0.095 ppm) were only identified in liver. 

The applied TRRs were rapidly eliminated (41.0% in urine and 13.3% in feces) and did not 

accumulate in fat tissues.

Half of the administered 14C-dose (54%-dose) was eliminated in the urine and feces (41% 

and 13% of dose, respectively). It was noted in the study report that some urine from day 5 

was lost when the animal was being transported for sacrifice. In milk, 3.69% of the dose was 

recovered, and in edible tissues (muscle, kidney, liver, and fat) 1.34% of the dose was 

recovered. The TRR levels in urine, feces, and milk appeared to reach a plateau by days 3-4.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 32 of 141

Figure 7. Pharmacokinetics of 14C XDE-208 in the Milk of Lactating Goats

Urine and Feces: In urine, sulfoxaflor was present at 49 % of the TRR (0.509 ppm) within 

12 hours of the first dose, and increased to levels of 78-87 % of the TRRs (6.0-7.5 ppm) over 

the 5 days of dosing. Three unidentified metabolites that were more polar than the parent 

(0.7-33 % TRRs, 0.017-0.840 ppm) as well as X11721061 (0.9-14.0 % TRR, 0.070-0.350 

ppm) were also eliminated in urine. Analysis of feces from day 3 showed that 114 % of the 

TRR (1.080 ppm) was identified as sulfoxaflor and ~ 6 % of the TRR (0.055 ppm) was an 

unidentified metabolite that was more polar than parent.

Milk TRR with Time

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

1 2 3 4 5 6

Time (days after dosing) 

TRR (mg/kg) 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 33 of 141

Table 17. Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Goat Matrices when Dosed with 14C-sulfoxoflor.

Compound

Milk 

(Day-4 am)

Milk

(day-5 pm)

Muscle

Loin

Muscle

Flank

Liver Kidney Fat

Subcutaneous

Fat

Omental

Fat

Renal

TRR=0.224 ppm TRR=0.199 ppm TRR=0.197 ppm TRR=0.205 ppm TRR=0.518 ppm TRR=0.435 ppm TRR=0.088 ppm TRR=0.074 ppm TRR=0.074 ppm

% 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm % 

TRR

ppm

Sulfoxaflor 94.2 0.211 94.0 0.187 97.0 0.191 96.1 0.197 60.4 0.313 89.0 0.387 94.3 0.083 97.3 0.072 94.6 0.070

X11721061 - - - - - - - - 3.3 0.017 - - - - - - - -

X11519540 0.9 0.002 1.0 0.002 - - - - 1.7 0.009 1.2 0.005 <1.1 <0.001 - - 1.4 <0.001

31.6 min. RT - - - - - - - - 1.2 0.006 1.8 0.008 2.8 0.003 2.0 0.002 2.7 0.002

X11596066 - - - - - - - - 18.3 0.095 - - - - - - - -

Total Identified 95.1 0.213 95.0 0.189 97.0 0.191 96.1 0.197 83.8 0.434 90.1 0.392 95.5 0.084 97.3 0.072 96.0 0.071

Total 

Characterized

7.1 0.016 7.0 0.014 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 25.9 0.134 5.1 0.030 4.6 0.004 4.1 0.003 2.7 0.002

Total Extracted 96.0 0.215 96.0 0.191 97.5 0.192 96.6 0.198 109.7 0.568 97.0 0.422 100 0.088 101.4 0.075 98.7 0.073

Unextractable PES - - - - 2.5 0.005 2.0 0.004 8.1 0.042 2.8 0.012 1.1 0.001 <1.4 <0.001 <1.4 <0.001

Accountability 96.0 96.0 100 98.5 118 99.8 101 103 100

-not detected
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 34 of 141

Lactating Goat (dosed with 14C-X11719474)

14C-X11719474 was administered orally to one lactating goat (LaMancha) at a nominal 

dose level of 10 mg/kg bw/day for 5 days following a 12 day acclimation period. The 

actual dose administered, based on food consumption during the study period, was 11.4 

mg/kg bw/day. The estimated dairy cow dietary burden for the X11719474 metabolite is 

1.4 ppm.

Milk samples were collected twice a day, urine was collected twice a day, and feces were 

collected daily just before dose administration. Sacrifice occurred ~6 hours after 

administration of the last dose. Muscle (loin and flank), liver, kidney, fat (subcutaneous, 

omental, renal), and the gastrointestinal tract with contents were collected. The TRR 

levels were determined in milk and urine by LSC, in fat by heat solubilization followed 

by LSC, and in tissues and feces by oxidative combustion. 

For milk, muscle, liver, kidney, and fat, the extractable TRRs were >83 %. Over 5 days 

of dosing, 34.8 % of the applied dose was eliminated in urine and 4.4 % in feces.

In milk, the TRRs had peaked at 0.145-0.173 ppm by days 3-4. The major residue in milk 

on days 3-4 was X11719474 (90.1-97.9 % TRR; 0.141-0.165 ppm). The TRRs in muscle 

were 0.131 and 0.123 ppm in loin and flank, respectively, and the major residue was 

X11719474 (104-109 % TRR; 0.134-0.136 ppm). For liver, the TRR was 0.226 ppm, and 

the major residue was X11719474 (107 % TRR; 0.242 ppm). The TRRs in kidney and fat 

were 0.327 ppm and 0.014-0.038 ppm, respectively, and the major residue was also 

X11719474 in kidney (108 % TRR; 0.352 ppm) and fat (71.4-94.7 % TRR; 0.010-0.036 

ppm).

X11719474 was not metabolized in the lactating goat. The major residue in all goat 

matrices was X11719474 (~71-108 % TRR, 0.010-0.352 ppm). There were no other 

identifiable residues. The applied TRRs were rapidly eliminated (34.8 % in urine and 4.4 

% in feces) and did not accumulate in fat tissues.

The overall recovery of the administered dose was ~59 %. A majority of the recovered 

administered 14C-dose (39.18%-dose) was eliminated in the urine and feces (34.76 % 

and 4.42% of dose, respectively). In milk, 1.14% -dose was recovered, and in edible 

tissues (muscle, kidney, liver, and fat) 0.65 %-dose was recovered. The TRR levels in 

urine and milk had reached a plateau by about days 3-4, and levels in feces had not 

reached a plateau by day 5.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 35 of 141

Table 18. Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive

Residues in Goat Milk when Dosed with 14C-X11719474. 

Compound

Milk 

(day-3 am)

Milk

(day-4 pm)

Milk

(day 4 am)

Milk 

(day 5 pm)

TRR=0.173 ppm TRR=0.162 ppm TRR=0.145 ppm TRR=0.151 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % 

TRR

ppm

X11719474 95.4 0.165 90.1 0.146 97.9 0.142 93.4 0.141

Total Identified 95.4 0.165 90.1 0.146 97.9 0.142 93.4 0.141

Total Characterized 2.3 0.004 3.7 0.006 4.8 0.007 4.0 0.006

Accountability 97.7 93.8 103 97.4
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 36 of 141

Table 19. Summary of Characterization and Identification of Radioactive Residues in Goat Tissues when Dosed with 14C-X11719474. 

Compound

Muscle

Loin

Muscle

Flank

Liver Kidney Fat

Subcutaneous

Fat

Omental

Fat

Renal

TRR=0.131 ppm TRR=0.123 ppm TRR=0.226 ppm TRR=0.327 ppm TRR=0.038 ppm TRR=0.014 ppm TRR=0.018 ppm

% TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm % TRR ppm

X11719474 104 0.136 109 0.134 107 0.242 108 0.352 94.7 0.036 71.4 0.010 72.2 0.013

Total Identified 104 0.136 109 0.134 107 0.242 108 0.352 94.7 0.036 71.4 0.010 72.2 0.013

Total 

Characterized

- - - - - - - - 2.6 0.001 14.3 0.002 11.1 0.002

Total Extracted 106 0.139 109 0.134 107 0.242 108 0.352 97.4 0.037 85.7 0.012 83.3 0.015

Unextractable PES 3.1 0.004 4.1 0.005 2.7 0.006 1.2 0.004 2.6 0.001 7.1 <0.001 5.6 <0.00

1

Accountability 109 113 110 109 100 92.9 88.9
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 37 of 141

Residue Analytical Methods (860.1340)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B5: Methods of Analysis

The enforcement and data collection methods are identical except for the solid-phase extraction 

(SPE) step. The enforcement method involves off-line SPE while the data collection method 

made use of on-line SPE.

High performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) methods with positive-ion electro spray (ESI) 

tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) were developed for data collection and enforcement of 

sulfoxaflor residues and the two metabolites X11719474 and X11721061. Method 091116 was 

developed for plant commodities, and Method 091188 was developed for animal commodities. 

Successful validation of both methods was reported by the registrant and by an independent 

laboratory. Additionally, successful radiovalidation was reported for both methods. The lowest 

level of method validation (LLMV) was 0.01 mg/kg for sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and 

X11721061 in all matrices. The limit of detection (LOD) was reported as 0.003 mg/kg for all 

three analytes in all matrices.

Enforcement method in plant matrices

A brief description of Method 091116 follows. Residues of sulfoxaflor and its metabolites were 

extracted from the sample matrices by homogenizing and shaking with an acetonitrile/water 

(80:20 v/v) solution. One hundred and twenty-five micro liters of a glycerin/methanol (10:90 

v/v) solution containing 0.10 μg/mL of a stable-isotope internal standard mixture were added to a 

500-μL aliquot of the extraction solution which was then concentrated to remove the organic 

solvent. The sample was reconstituted with 500 μL of 0.01 N sodium hydroxide solution and 

heated at 50 °C for 30 minutes to hydrolyze base-labile conjugates. The mixture was then 

acidified with 125 μL of a 0.25% formic acid solution followed by the addition of 250 μL of a 10 

mg/mL glucosidase from Aspergillus Niger solution. The sample was then incubated at 50 °C 

for 90 minutes to hydrolyze glucosidase-labile conjugates. The solution was purified using a 

reverse-phase polymeric solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridge. After elution from the SPE 

cartridge with an acetonitrile/water (80:20 v/v) solution containing 0.1% formic acid, the sample 

was then analyzed by LC/MS/MS. A C18 type column (reverse phase) was used, employing 

gradient elution using two mobile phases, i.e., acetonitrile containing 0.01% formic acid and 

water containing 0.01% formic acid. 

The quantitative determination was carried out with internal and external standardization. The 

internal standards were a mixture of stable-isotopes (D3-sulfoxaflor; D3-sulfoxaflor urea; D3-

sulfoxaflor alcohol). The external standards were a mixture of sulfoxaflor (MW = 277), 

X11719474 (MW = 295), and X11721061 (MW = 191). 

LC/MS/MS affords a highly-specific method for both the quantitation and confirmation of 

residue identity by retention time matching in conjunction with monitoring the MS/MS ion 

transitions for each analyte as follows: sulfoxaflor at m/z 278.09/174.00 for quantitation and m/z 

278.09/154.00 for confirmation; X11719474 at m/z 296.00/174.00 for quantitation and m/z 

296.00/104.90 for confirmation for all matrices except orange, lemon and soybean, in which ion 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 38 of 141

transition m/z 296.00/104.10 was used for confirmation; and X11721061 at m/z 191.87/129.90 

for quantitation and m/z 191.87/78.00 for confirmation.

Validation data for the LC/MS/MS analytical Method 091116 for the determination of residues 

of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 was submitted for: the acidic crops/processed 

commodity (whole orange and lemon fruits; orange juice), dry crops (wheat grain and straw; dry 

bean grain), wet crops (potato tuber; peach whole fruit; grape), and oily crops (soybean seed; 

almond nutmeat; canola seed).

An independent laboratory validation (ILV) of Method 091116 was conducted. All the 

recoveries were within acceptable ranges and demonstrate a successful independent laboratory 

validation of Method 091116.

Data generation methods in plants

A data generation method for plants was developed for determining residues of sulfoxaflor, 

X11719474, and X11721061 in/on acidic crops (whole orange fruit, whole lemon fruit, and 

orange juice), dry crops (wheat grain, wheat straw, and dry bean grain), wet crops (potato tuber, 

peach whole fruit, and grape), and oily crops (soybean seed, almond nutmeat, and canola seed).

Briefly, residues of sulfoxaflor and its metabolites were extracted from the sample matrices by

homogenizing and shaking with an acetonitrile/water (80:20 v/v) solution. Fifty micro liters of a 

glycerin/methanol (10:90 v/v) solution containing 0.10 μg/mL of a stable-isotope internal 

standard mixture were added to a 200-μL aliquot of the extraction solution which was then 

concentrated to remove the organic solvent. The sample was reconstituted with 200 μL of 0.01 N 

sodium hydroxide solution and heated at 50°C for 30 minutes to hydrolyze base-labile 

conjugates. The mixture was then acidified with 50 μL of a 0.25% formic acid solution followed 

by the addition of 100 μL of a 10 mg/mL glucosidase from Aspergillus Niger solution. The 

sample was then incubated at 50 °C for 90 minutes to hydrolyze glucosidase-labile conjugates. 

The solution was purified using an on-line reverse-phase polymeric solid-phase extraction (SPE) 

cartridge and then analyzed by liquid chromatography with positive-ion electro spray tandem 

mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). A C18 type column (reverse phase) was used, employing 

gradient elution using two mobile phases, i.e., acetonitrile containing 0.01% formic acid and 

water containing 0.01% formic acid. The method is similar to the proposed enforcement 

method, except that the SPE is on-line for data gathering.

The data generating method has been adequately validated on a diverse set of crops. A second 

plant method validation report for the data generating method was submitted.

 

Enforcement method in animal matrices

LC/MS/MS method 091188 was submitted for determining residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, 

and X11721061 in animal matrices (bovine cream, milk, muscle, liver, kidney, and fat; and in 

poultry eggs, muscle, liver, and fat), along with validation data.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 39 of 141

This method separately determines residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 in 

animal matrices (milk, eggs, and bovine/poultry tissues).

For each matrix, samples are homogenized and residues are extracted one time from 1.0 g 

samples with an acetonitrile/water (80:20) solution. Following centrifugation, the resulting 

extract is centrifuged, evaporated, and reconstituted in 0.01 N hydrochloric acid. The sample is 

then cleaned-up using an SPE column. The SPE column is washed with 0.01 N hydrochloric acid 

and the residues are eluted with acetonitrile/water/formic acid (80/20/0.1). After adding the 

internal standard (see below), and reconstituting in acetonitrile/water/formic acid (80/20/0.1), 

residues are analyzed by HPLC with positive-ion electro spray (ESI) tandem mass spectrometry 

(LC/MS/MS). A Phenomenex Synergi Hydro RP (reverse phase) column is used, employing 

gradient elution using two mobile phases, i.e., acetonitrile containing 0.01% formic acid and 

water containing 0.01% formic acid. 

The quantitative determination was carried out with internal and external standardization. The 

internal standards were a mixture of stable-isotopes (D3-sulfoxaflor; D3-sulfoxaflor urea; D3-

sulfoxaflor alcohol). The external standards were a mixture of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and 

X11721061.

Data generation methods for animal matrices

Ruminants and Poultry - A data generation method for poultry commodities was submitted. This 

method separately determines residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 in poultry 

tissues (fat, muscle, and liver) and eggs.

For each matrix, residues are homogenized and extracted one time from 1.0 g samples with an 

acetonitrile/water (80:20) solution. Following centrifugation, the resulting extract is cleaned up 

by on-line SPE. The SPE cartridge is washed with water, and the residues are eluted with 

acetonitrile/water/formic acid (80/20/0.1) onto a reverse phase analytical column. Residues are 

analyzed by LC/MS/MS. The mobile phase is acetontrile and water, each containing 0.10 % 

formic acid, using gradient elution. The quantitative determination was carried out with internal 

and external standardization. The internal standards were a mixture of stable-isotopes (D3-

sulfoxaflor; D3-sulfoxaflor urea; D3-sulfoxaflor alcohol). The external standards were a mixture 

of sulfoxaflor (MW = 277), X11719474 (MW = 295), and X11721061. (MW = 191).

The LC/MS/MS method developed for determining residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and 

X11721061 in ruminant and poultry tissues, including eggs and milk, has a validated LOQ of 

0.01 ppm for each analyte in each matrix. Recoveries were within the generally recognized 

acceptable range (70-120) except for two cream samples.

Radiovalidation of enforcement methods for plants and animal matrices

Data were submitted for the radiovalidation of the proposed enforcement methods 091116 and 

091188 for plant and animal commodities, respectively, where samples from the tomato pea, 

lettuce, rice, and ruminant metabolism studies were analyzed for sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and 

X11721061 by the two methods.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 40 of 141

Conclusions: The generally good agreement between the results from the metabolism study and 

the proposed enforcement methods (Method 091116 for plants and 091188 for animals) 

demonstrates successful radiovalidation of the analytical method and provides assurance that the 

enforcement methods are capable of extracting bioincurred residues of interest from plant and 

animal commodities. It is also noted that the same acetonitrile/water (80:20) mixture was used 

for extraction in the plant and animal metabolism studies, and is used in the proposed 

enforcement methods.

Multiresidue Methods (860.1360)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B5: Methods of Analysis

The FDA Multi-Residue Method Test guidelines, as described in the Pesticide Analytical 

Manual (PAM), are not applicable for the analysis of sulfoxaflor, due to low recoveries.

Sulfoxaflor only slightly fluoresced and is not suitable for Protocol A. Sulfoxaflor is not 

recovered through fluorisil and is not suitable for analysis using Protocol D, E, or F. Sulfoxaflor 

analysis using Protocol C has low recoveries.

Note: There are similarities between the German DFG S19 method and the proposed 

enforcement method (Method 091116). It is expected that labs using this method would obtain 

satisfactory results for sulfoxaflor residues using this method.

Storage Stability (860.1380)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7

Dow AgroSciences, LLC has submitted the results of a 24-month storage stability study with 

sulfoxaflor in orange whole fruit, peach whole fruit, wheat grain, and soybean seed. The crops 

selected for frozen storage stability of residues represent the four European Union commodity 

categories (high acid content, high water content, dry, and high fat content). Untreated samples 

of each commodity were homogenized and spiked separately (different samples for the parent 

and the two metabolites) with sulfoxaflor and metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 at 0.10 

ppm. Samples were placed in frozen storage at ca. -20oC and analyzed at storage intervals of 0, 

30, 60, 182, 288, 375, 548, and 680 days.

Samples were analyzed for residues of sulfoxaflor and its metabolites X11719474 and 

X11721061 using a liquid chromatographic system with tandem mass spectrometers 

(LC/MS/MS), Dow AgroSciences Methods 091116 (all storage intervals except 12-, 18- and 22-

month periods) and 091031 (12-, 18- and 22-month periods). The limit of quantitation (LOQ) 

for each analyte was 0.010 ppm.

Conclusions: The submitted storage stability results indicate that residues of sulfoxaflor, 

X11719474, and X11721061 are stable in frozen storage for at least 680 days in plant matrices 

and at least 9 weeks in livestock commodities. These intervals are adequate to cover the sample 

storage intervals in the plant magnitude of the residue studies and the animal feeding studies.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 41 of 141

Water, Fish, and Irrigated Crops (860.1400)

The proposed uses are not directly relevant to this guideline topic. However, application of 

sulfoxaflor could result in residues in surface water bodies. Sulfoxaflor is soluble in water (570 

mg/L at 200

C) and is relatively stable to biodegradation in aquatic systems, i.e., it is stable to 

hydrolysis, and aqueous photolysis is not a major route of degradation. These properties indicate 

that sulfoxaflor might end up in fish tissues. However, in the aerobic soil system, sulfoxaflor 

degrades rather quickly to its major degradate X-474 (90th percentile t1⁄2= 0.4 days, range of <0.1 

to 0.6 days). In eight US and EU soils, sulfoxaflor residues were at nondetectable levels within 

one day in one soil, 3-4 days in five soils, and 7-14 days in two soils. The log KO/W for 

sulfoxaflor is 0.802 at pH 7, which suggests that sulfoxaflor will not partition into fat tissue. In 

addition, the livestock metabolism and feeding studies all confirm that sulfoxaflor residues do 

not partition into the fat and do not bioaccumulate in livestock tissue. It is for these reasons that 

sulfoxaflor residues in fish are not expected.

Catfish are bottom feeders and residues in catfish serve as a marker for pesticide residues. The 

USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP) does not have information for sulfoxaflor residues in 

catfish since it is a new chemical.

Food Handling (860.1460)

There are no proposed uses for which this guideline topic is relevant.

Meat, Milk, Poultry, and Eggs (860.1480)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7

ROCKS Reference List

Sulfoxaflor is being proposed for use on numerous commodities that are significant livestock 

feedstuffs, including the following: almond hulls, carrot culls; citrus pulp, dried; potato culls and 

processed waste; sugar beet, molasses; soybean seed, forage, hay, meal, and hulls; wet apple 

pomace; wheat grain, forage, hay, and straw; barley grain, forage, hay, and straw; aspirated grain 

fractions; canola meal; and cotton seed, meal, hulls, and gin byproducts. There is the potential 

for transfer of residues to livestock commodities, and the registrant conducted both dairy cattle 

and poultry (laying hen) feeding studies.

Poultry

Sixty Lohman laying hens (12 hens/dosing and control group) were administered gelatin 

capsules containing sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 for 29 or 30 consecutive days. The 

two metabolites were included with parent compound in order to account for the formation of 

these compounds in the treated RACs and associated commodities used as livestock feed items. 

The target and actual dosing rates were as follows in Table 20.

Table 20. Dosing rates used in the poultry feeding study.

Target Dose (ppm) Actual Dose (ppm)a

Sulfoxaflor X11719474 X11721061 Sulfoxaflor X11719474 X11721061
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 42 of 141

0.14 0.01 0.0225 0.145 0.0103 0.023

0.70 0.04 0.09 0.757 0.043 0.097

2.1 0.12 0.27 2.096 0.120 0.269

10.5 0.60 1.35 10.70 0.611 1.375

a Based on actual feed consumption.

Eggs were collected daily during the dosing period and analyzed for sulfoxaflor and its two 

metabolites. On day 29 after the first dose, the hens were sacrificed and liver, fat, muscle (leg 

and breast), and overlaying skin together with any associated fat were collected for analysis. 

Additionally, thirty-six separate laying hens were administered sulfoxaflor at 10.5 mg/kg for 28 

consecutive days in order to investigate the depuration of sulfoxaflor and its metabolite in eggs 

and tissues. The depuration period was 21 days. Eggs were collected and analyzed at 10 time 

intervals during the depuration period, while other tissue samples were analyzed four times

during depuration. 

Tissue and egg samples were analyzed using LC/MS/MS Method 091188 (LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg 

and LOD of 0.003 mg/kg). Adequate concurrent storage stability data were submitted with the 

feeding study to support the storage conditions and durations of all samples.

Table 21 summarizes the concentration of sulfoxaflor and its metabolites in eggs and poultry 

tissues at the four dosing levels administered. In eggs, quantifiable residues of sulfoxaflor were 

observed at all dose levels except the lowest dose level. Residues of metabolite X11719474 

were below the LOQ in eggs at all dose levels except the highest dose level. Residues of the 

metabolite X11721061 were below the LOQ in eggs at all dose levels and sampling intervals. 

Residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolite X11719474 in eggs reached a plateau within 10 days of 

dosing. Residues levels of sulfoxaflor, after reaching a plateau, ranged from <0.01 to 0.594 ppm 

and were dependent on dose level. Residues levels of X11719474 ranged from 0.012-0.022 ppm

at the high dose level. 

Quantifiable residues of sulfoxaflor transferred into liver at all dose levels and into muscle and 

fat at dose levels of 0.757 ppm and higher. In general residues were highest in liver and lowest 

in fat. Residues of sulfoxaflor ranged from 0.012 to 1.193 ppm in liver, from 0.025 to 0.659 ppm 

in muscle, and from 0.011 to 0.184 ppm in fat. Quantifiable residues of metabolite X11719474 

were observed in liver (0.021-0.026 ppm) and muscle (0.013-0.023 ppm) at the highest dose 

level only. Quantifiable residues of metabolite X11721061 were observed only in liver at the 

two highest dose levels, ranging from 0.016 to 0.088 ppm.

Depuration data at the high dose level demonstrates that residues levels declined in eggs and all 

tissues following dosing cessation. In eggs, sulfoxaflor residues fell by approximately an order 

of magnitude after 6 days of depuration. Similar large residue reductions were observed in other 

poultry tissues. All residues were below the LOQ of 0.01 ppm following 21 days of depuration. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 43 of 141

Table 21. Summary of Residue Data for Eggs and Tissues from the Poultry Feeding Study 

with Sulfoxaflor, X11719474 and X11721061.

Analyte/ 

Matrix

Dose Level 

(ppm) 

Residues (ppm)a

n Minimum Maximum Median Mean Std. Dev.

Sulfoxaflor

Eggs

0.145 24 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.757 24 0.020 0.059 0.031 0.031 0.007

2.096 24 0.055 0.099 0.081 0.080 0.011

10.7 48 0.220 0.594 0.423 0.424 0.075

Muscle

0.145 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.757 3 0.025 0.042 0.035 0.034 0.009

2.096 3 0.073 0.109 0.086 0.089 0.018

10.7 3 0.442 0.659 0.448 0.516 0.124

Liver

0.145 3 0.012 0.028 0.015 0.018 0.009

0.757 3 0.052 0.150 0.110 0.104 0.049

2.096 3 0.153 0.232 0.171 0.185 0.041

10.7 3 1.111 1.193 1.118 1.141 0.045

Fat

0.145 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.757 3 0.011 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.001

2.096 3 0.028 0.048 0.033 0.036 0.010

10.7 3 0.153 0.184 0.164 0.167 0.016

X11719474

Eggsb

0.0103 24 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.043 24 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.120 24 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.611 48 0.012 0.022 0.015 0.016 0.002

Muscle

0.0103 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.043 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.120 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.611 3 0.013 0.023 0.018 0.018 0.005

Liver

0.0103 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.043 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.120 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.611 3 0.021 0.026 0.026 0.024 0.003

Fat

0.0103 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.043 3 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 NA

0.120 3 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 NA

0.611 3 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 NA

X11721061

Eggs

0.023 24 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.097 24 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.269 24 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 44 of 141

Table 21. Summary of Residue Data for Eggs and Tissues from the Poultry Feeding Study 

with Sulfoxaflor, X11719474 and X11721061.

Analyte/ 

Matrix

Dose Level 

(ppm) 

Residues (ppm)a

n Minimum Maximum Median Mean Std. Dev.

1.375 48 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

Muscle

0.023 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.097 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.269 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

1.375 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

Liver

0.023 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.097 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.269 3 <0.01 0.020 0.016 0.015 0.005

1.375 3 0.065 0.088 0.066 0.073 0.013

Fat

0.023 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.097 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.269 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

1.375 3 <0.01 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.001

NA = Not applicable. a The LOQ (0.01 ppm) was used for all residues reported as <LOQ in all calculations (mean, median, etc.). b Egg residues 

are from samples collected from Study Days 10-27 or 28; residues were considered to have reached a plateau. 

Cattle

Nineteen lactating Friesian/Holstein dairy cows (Bos taurus; four cows/treatment group, four 

treatment groups, and three control cows) were administered gelatin capsules containing 

sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 for 29 or 30 consecutive days. The metabolites were 

included with parent compound in order to account for the formation of these compounds in the 

treated raw agricultural commodities and associated livestock feed items, i.e., they are significant 

plant metabolites. The target and actual dosing rates were as follows in Table 22.

Table 22. Dosing rates used in the bovine feeding study.

Target Dose (ppm) Actual Dose (ppm)a

Sulfoxaflor X11719474 X11721061 Sulfoxaflor X11719474 X11721061

0.5 0.05 0.2 0.45 0.045 0.180

2.5 0.25 1.0 2.37 0.237 0.949

7.5 0.75 3.0 6.75 0.675 2.70

37.5 3.75 15.0 35.19 3.52 14.08

a Based on actual feed consumption.

Milk was collected twice daily during the dosing period. The milk was kept separate and 

analyzed. On Days 22 and 26, aliquots of milk were mechanically separated into cream and 

skim milk fractions and analyzed. In additional, twelve cows were administered sulfoxaflor at 

37.5 mg/kg for 28 consecutive days in order to investigate the depuration of sulfoxaflor and its 

metabolite in milk and cow tissues over a 21-day period. Milk samples were collected and 

analyzed at 10 intervals during the depuration period, while other tissue samples were analyzed 

at four intervals during depuration. Cows from the four treatment groups and the control group 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 45 of 141

were sacrificed within 1-7 hours of receiving the final dose; cows from the depuration study 

were sacrificed 3, 7, 14, and 21 days post-dosing. The following tissue samples were collected 

immediately after slaughter: muscle (including hind leg or flank, loin, and diaphragm), liver 

(sub sampled from several areas), kidney (sub sampled from at least three areas of each kidney), 

and fat (including mesenteric, subcutaneous, and renal). The samples were kept separate and 

analyzed/reported for each individual cow.

Tissue and milk samples were analyzed for residue by LC/MS/MS using Method 091188. 

Adequate concurrent storage stability data were submitted with the feeding study to support the 

storage conditions and durations of all samples.

Residues of sulfoxaflor and its major metabolites in milk and cow tissues are summarized in 

Table 23. Residues of sulfoxaflor transferred into milk, skim milk, and cream at all the dose 

levels. Residues of metabolite X11719474 transferred into milk only at the two highest dose 

levels and into skim milk and cream at the highest dose level. Residues of metabolite 

X11721061 were below the LOQ in milk, skim milk, and cream at all dose levels and sampling 

intervals. Residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolite X11719474 reached a plateau in milk within 8 

days of dosing. There was no evidence of preferential transfer of residues to skim milk or cream 

from Study Days 22 and 26. In general, residues of sulfoxaflor were slightly lower in cream than

skin milk at all dose levels. For example, at the 2.37 ppm feeding level on day 26, residues of 

sulfoxaflor in skim milk ranged from 0.067–0.114 ppm, while sulfoxaflor residues in cream 

ranged from 0.042-0.080 ppm.

In tissues, residues of sulfoxaflor transferred into muscle, fat, liver, and kidney at all dose levels. 

Residues of metabolite X11719474 transferred into liver and kidney only at the two highest dose 

levels, and transferred into muscle and fat at the highest dose level only. Quantifiable residues of 

metabolite X11721061 were observed only at the highest dose level in muscle, fat, liver, and 

kidney. Residues were generally highest in liver and kidney and lowest in fat. At the 6.75-ppm 

sulfoxaflor dose level, residues of metabolite X11719474 were 0.012-0.015 ppm in liver and 

0.014-0.022 ppm in kidney. At the highest dose level, respective residues of metabolites 

X11719474 and X11721061 were 0.053-0.087 and <0.01-0.020 ppm in liver, 0.069-0.101 and 

<0.01-0.273 ppm in kidney, 0.031-0.050 and <0.01-0.011 ppm in muscle, and <0.01-0.026 and 

0.01-0.025 ppm in fat. The maximum X11721061 residue level of 0.273 ppm in kidney in the 

highest dose group was observed from only one cow, and the residue from this cow exceeded the 

residues observed for the remaining three cows by >10x.

The depuration data generated at the highest dose level (35.2 ppm sulfoxaflor) showed that 

residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites decreased rapidly in milk and tissues following dosing 

cessation. All residues were below the LOQ in milk and tissues following 13-14 days of 

depuration, except for residues of sulfoxaflor at 0.029 ppm in kidney in a single cow after 21 

days of depuration.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 46 of 141

Table 23. Summary of Sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 Residue Data for Whole 

Milk and Tissue (n = # of individual samples)

Analyte/ 

Matrix

Dose Level 

(mg/kg)

Residues (mg/kg)a

n Minimum Maximum Median Mean Std. Dev.

Sulfoxaflor

Milk b

0.45 28 0.013 0.038 0.024 0.024 0.006

2.37 25 0.056 0.123 0.090 0.088 0.017

6.75 28 0.181 0.288 0.243 0.242 0.026

35.19 64 0.895 1.679 1.253 1.274 0.210

Muscle

0.45 4 0.017 0.026 0.020 0.021 0.004

2.37 3 0.086 0.155 0.105 0.115 0.036

6.75 4 0.242 0.311 0.271 0.274 0.035

35.19 4 1.262 1.691 1.453 1.465 0.221

Fat

0.45 4 <0.01 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.002

2.37 3 0.032 0.057 0.039 0.043 0.013

6.75 4 0.091 0.139 0.099 0.107 0.022

35.19 4 0.449 0.915 0.592 0.637 0.212

Liver

0.45 4 0.043 0.061 0.057 0.054 0.009

2.37 3 0.238 0.375 0.283 0.299 0.070

6.75 4 0.604 0.758 0.744 0.713 0.073

35.19 4 3.196 4.030 3.766 3.689 0.364

Kidney

0.45 4 0.026 0.040 0.034 0.034 0.006

2.37 3 0.140 0.210 0.184 0.178 0.035

6.75 4 0.433 0.566 0.461 0.480 0.059

35.19 4 1.931 2.442 2.282 2.234 0.218

X11719474

Milk b

0.045 28 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.237 25 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.675 28 <0.01 0.015 0.010 0.011 0.001

3.52 64 0.026 0.057 0.035 0.038 0.009

Muscle

0.045 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.237 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.675 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

3.52 4 0.031 0.050 0.041 0.041 0.008

Fat

0.045 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.237 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.675 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

3.52 4 <0.01 0.026 0.010 0.014 0.008

Liver

0.045 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.237 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.675 4 0.012 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.001

3.52 4 0.053 0.087 0.069 0.069 0.014
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 47 of 141

Table 23. Summary of Sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 Residue Data for Whole 

Milk and Tissue (n = # of individual samples)

Analyte/ 

Matrix

Dose Level 

(mg/kg)

Residues (mg/kg)a

n Minimum Maximum Median Mean Std. Dev.

Kidney

0.045 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.237 3 <0.01 0.010 0.010 0.010 <0.001

0.675 4 0.014 0.022 0.020 0.019 0.003

3.52 4 0.069 0.101 0.093 0.089 0.015

X11721061

Milk

0.180 28 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.949 25 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

2.70 28 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

14.08 64 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

Muscle

0.180 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.949 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

2.70 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

14.08 4 <0.01 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.001

Fat

0.180 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.949 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

2.70 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

14.08 4 0.01 0.025 0.015 0.016 0.007

Liver

0.180 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.949 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

2.70 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

14.08 4 <0.01 0.020 0.012 0.014 0.005

Kidney

0.180 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

0.949 3 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

2.70 4 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

14.08 4 <0.010 0.273c 0.020 0.081 0.128

a The LOQ (0.01 ppm) was used for all residues reported as <LOQ in all calculations (mean, median, etc.). NA = Not applicable. b Milk 

residues are from samples collected from Study Days 8-28 or 29, including samples from the depuration group; residues were considered to 

have reached a plateau during this time. c Residue for one cow in this group (0.273 ppm) was >10x higher than those for the other cows: 

0.025, 0.015, and <0.01 ppm.

Maximum Reasonably Balanced Diets (MRBDs)

MRBDs for beef cattle, dairy cattle, swine, and poultry were calculated according to HED’s 

guidance document: “Revisions of Table 1 Feedstuffs (OCSPP Guideline 860.1000; June 

2008),” This document provides guidance for constructing balanced diets that take into account 

the nutritional needs of livestock animals. In addition, the OECD guidance for animal diets was 

also consulted. Cattle, swine, and poultry require adequate amounts of protein, carbohydrate, and 

roughage in their diets. The diets that have been constructed ensure that these nutritional needs 

are met. The diets can be considered to be MRBDs because for each of the three food groups 

given, the commodities with the highest residue contributions were used to construct the diets. 

As a result, the diets are high-end, conservative estimates of the residue levels to which the 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 48 of 141

livestock animals will be exposed. Tables 24 through 27, provide the dietary burdens for beef 

cattle, dairy cattle, swine, and poultry, respectively. In the following tables, R represents 

roughage, CC represents carbohydrate concentrate, and PC represents protein concentrate. The 

contribution of a particular feed item to the diet is determined with the following equations: 

Contribution = ([highest residue or STMR/% DM] X % diet) for beef and dairy cattle; and 

contribution = ([highest residue or STMR] X % diet) for poultry and swine. For processed feed 

items, the concentration factor times the highest field trial or STMR value was used.

Table 24. Calculation of Dietary Burdens of Sulfoxaflor Residues to Beef Cattle.

Feedstuff Type1 % Dry 

Matter

% of Diet

(

max ever 

used)

Highest Residue

or STMR1

(ppm)

Dietary Contribution 

(ppm)3

Beef Cattle

Barley, grain (STMR) CC 88 50 0.055 0.03

Grain, aspirated fractions

(STMR) (soybean)

CC 85 5 1.24

(0.013 x 95)

0.07

Wheat, grain (STMR) CC 89 5

(20)

0.015 0.0008

Wheat, milled bypdts

(STMR)

CC 88 20 0.015 0.003

CC 80% 

Barley, straw (HR) R 89 10 2.02 0.25

Wheat, straw (HR)

(500 WDG form.)

R 88 5

(10)

1.64 0.09

R 15%

Canola, meal (STMR) PC 88 5 0.08

(0.043 x 1.9)

0.005

PC 5% 

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- 0.45

1 STMR (supervised trial median residue) values are obtained from the Tolerance/MRL spreadsheet which only included

 independent field trials. The highest values observed are from the Tier II reviews.

2 One residue value was 2.2 ppm, it was reanalyzed as 1.8 ppm. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 49 of 141

Table 25. Calculation of Dietary Burdens of Sulfoxaflor Residues to Dairy Cattle.

Feedstuff Type1 % Dry 

Matter2

% Diet 

(max ever 

used)

Highest Residue

or STMR (ppm)

Dietary Contribution 

(ppm)3

Dairy Cattle

Apple pomace, wet (STMR) CC 40 10 0.077

(0.07 x 1.1)

0.02

Barley, grain (STMR) CC 88 35

(45)

0.055 0.022

 45% 

Barley, straw (HR) R 89 5

(20)

2.02 0.11

Soybean, forage/silage (HR) R 35 20 1.73 0.99

Wheat, forage (HR) R 25 20 1.4 1.12

 45% 

Canola, meal (STMR) PC 88 10 0.08

(0.043 x 1.9)

0.009

 10% 

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- 2.27

Table 26. Calculation of Dietary Burdens of Sulfoxaflor Residues to Poultry.

Feedstuff Type1 % Dry 

Matter

% Diet

(

max ever 

used)

Highest Residue

or STMR

(ppm)

Dietary Contribution 

(ppm)3

Poultry

Barley, grain (STMR) CC 75 0.055 0.04

75

Canola, meal (STMR) PC 15 0.08

(0.043 x 1.9)

0.012

Cotton meal (STMR) PC 10

(20)

0.02

(0.022 x 0.8)

0.002

25

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- 0.054
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 50 of 141

Table 27. Calculation of Dietary Burdens of Sulfoxaflor Residues to Swine.

Feedstuff Type1 % Dry 

Matter

% Diet

(

max ever 

used)

Highest Residue

or STMR

(ppm)

Dietary Contribution 

(ppm)3

Swine

Barley, grain (STMR) CC 20 0.055 0.011

Wheat, milled bypdts

(STMR)

CC 50 0.015 0.007

85

Canola, meal (STMR) PC 15 0.08

(0.043 x 1.9)

0.012

15

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- 0.030

Potential Residue Levels in Milk, Eggs, and Tissues

The results of the feeding study and the MRBDs calculated above were used to determine the 

appropriate tolerance levels for livestock commodities. The registrant performed the feeding 

studies at 0.25X, 1X, 3X, and 15X the MRBDs that the registrant calculated. As stated above, 

the feeding levels turned out to be approximately 0.1X, 1.0X, 3.0X, and 15.5X the MRBD level 

that HED calculated for dairy cattle, and 0.2X, 0.8X, 2.1X, and 11x the MRBD level that HED 

calculated for poultry. As stated in the Nature of the Residue section of this summary document, 

the residues of concern in livestock commodities for both tolerance enforcement and risk 

assessment is parent sulfoxaflor.

Comparison of these dietary burden estimates to residue levels observed in the lactating cattle 

and laying hen feeding studies (Figures 8 and 9), result in anticipated residues shown in Tables 

28 (cattle and swine) and 29 (poultry). Based on conservative assumptions, which are 

appropriate for deriving tolerance levels in livestock commodities, quantifiable residues in 

commodities from cattle, horses, goats, and sheep may occur. For swine and poultry, residues 

are expected to be less than the LOQ.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 51 of 141

Figure 8. Lactating Cattle Feeding Study - Maximum Residues.

Table 28. Summary of Maximum Residues from the Dairy Cattle Feeding Study and Anticipated Residues.

Dose Level, ppm Milk Muscle Fat Liver Kidney

0.45 0.013 0.017 0.01 0.043 0.026

2.37 0.056 0.086 0.032 0.238 0.14

6.75 0.181 0.242 0.091 0.604 0.433

35.19 0.895 1.262 0.449 3.196 1.931

Slope 0.0255 0.0359 0.0128 0.0908 0.0552

r

2 0.9999 1.0000 0.9998 0.9999 0.9990

Livestock Dietary Burden, ppm Anticipated Residues

Beef Cattle 0.45 --- 0.016 0.006 0.041 0.025

Dairy Cattle 2.27 0.058 0.081 0.029 0.206 0.125

Swine 0.030 --- 0.001 0.000 0.003 0.002

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Sulfoxaflor Residue, ppm

Dose Level, ppm

Milk

Muscle

Fat

Liver

Kidney
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 52 of 141

Figure 9. Laying Hen Feeding Study - Maximum Residues.

Table 29. Summary of Maximum Residues from the Laying Hen Feeding Study and Anticipated Residues.

Dose Level, ppm Eggs Muscle Fat Liver

0.145 0.01 0.01 0.028 0.01

0.757 0.059 0.042 0.15 0.013

2.096 0.099 0.109 0.232 0.048

10.7 0.594 0.659 1.193 0.184

Slope 0.0553 0.0612 0.1119 0.0174

r

2 0.9984 0.9991 0.9970 0.9947

Livestock Dietary Burden, ppm Anticipated Residues

Poultry 0.054 0.003 0.003 0.006 0.001

The results of these calculations indicate that tolerances will be needed for most livestock 

commodities. HED is recommending in favor of the following tolerances: 0.15 ppm for the 

meat of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep, 0.10 ppm for the fat of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep, 0.40

ppm for the meat byproducts of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep, and 0.15 ppm for milk. HED 

recommends that tolerances be set at the LOQ (0.01 ppm) for all hog commodities.

Tolerances are recommended at the LOQ level (0.01 ppm) for poultry meat, fat, byproducts, and 

eggs. 

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Sulfoxaflor Residue, ppm

Dose Level, ppm

Eggs

Muscle

Liver

Fat
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 53 of 141

Conclusions: The cattle and poultry feeding studies are adequate and can be used to determine 

the appropriate tolerance levels for livestock commodities.

Based on the MRBDs that were constructed and the results of the feeding studies, tolerances will 

be needed for some livestock commodities. See Table 1 for a list of the recommended livestock

commodity tolerances and the correct commodity definitions.

Crop Field Trials (860.1500)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7

Five hundred and eighty-three supervised sulfoxaflor residue trials were conducted in Australia,

the European Union (NZ/SZ), NAFTA areas, and Brazil using foliar application of SC 

formulations, as summarized below. A table summarizing the residue data is included in 

Appendix 3.

Analytical Method Residues of sulfoxaflor and its metabolites were determined by 

LC/MS/MS. The data gathering method for plants was used for sample analysis. Unless stated 

otherwise, in all trials, untreated control plots gave residues <LOQ. The validated limit of 

quantitation (LOQ) was 0.010 ppm for each analyte in the RACs; and the reported limits of 

detections (LODs) were 0.005 ppm (Australia and New Zealand study) or 0.003 ppm (EU and 

US studies). Due to instrument availability at the Australian test site, the analytical method was 

modified to suit laboratory equipment. Specifically, after extracting samples with 

acetonitrile/water (80:20) solution, a 500 μL aliquot of the extract was removed instead of a 200 

μL aliquot, as per the method. All the reagents were adjusted by a 2.5X factor. In addition, the 

on-line solid-phase extraction using a HySphere C18HD SPE cartridge cleanup was replaced by 

off line solid-phase using 30 mg/1 mL HLB column. 

Adjuvants All the sulfoxaflor field trials were conducted using adjuvants; such as an 

organosilicone surfactant, a fatty-acid type surfactant (NIS), or a crop oil concentrate. In 

addition for celery and oranges, side-by-side testing of adjuvants was conducted. For celery, 

three of the FL trials included side-by-side plots to compare residues following applications 

made with a non-ionic surfactant (NIS) or a organosilicone surfactant (OSS). Residues of 

sulfoxaflor in/on celery harvested at a 3-day PHI were 0.058-0.170 ppm (mean 0.105 ppm) 

following applications made without an additive, 0.064-0.212 ppm (mean 0.147 ppm) following 

applications made with an organosilicone surfactant (OSS), and 0.076-0.147 ppm (mean 0.124 

ppm) following applications made with a NIS. For oranges, three of the CA trials included sideby-side plots to conduct a test to compare residues following applications made with no 

adjuvant, with a non-ionic surfactant (NIS), and with a crop oil concentrate (COC). Residues of 

sulfoxaflor in/on oranges harvested at a 1-day PHI were 0.096-0.162 ppm (mean 0.115 ppm) 

following applications with an NIS and 0.062-0.136 ppm (mean 0.103 ppm) following 

applications made with a COC. Residues of sulfoxaflor in/on oranges harvested at a 7-day PHI 

were 0.038-0.116 ppm (mean 0.089 ppm) following applications with an NIS and 0.043-

0.144 ppm (mean 0.072 ppm) following applications made with a COC. 

The use of surfactants was included in all the field trial data, and is considered to be fully 

evaluated.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 54 of 141

WDG formulation – In the side-by-side trials with the SC formulation in lettuce, plums, radish, 

soybeans and wheat, residues of sulfoxaflor and its metabolites were generally similar to those 

following application of the SC formulation. The use of the WDG formulation is considered to 

have been fully evaluated.

Greenhouse Uses. Limited data were submitted for sulfoxaflor residues in greenhouse 

tomatoes. No greenhouse uses were requested with this submission. If greenhouse uses are 

requested in the future, additional data would be required.

Root and Tuber Vegetables, Crop Group 1

Carrots

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on carrots from 12 field 

trials conducted in Europe and NAFTA areas during 2008 and 2009: 8 trials were conducted in 

Europe (4 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, Germany, Hungary, Poland, and the United Kingdom; 

and 4 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, France, Greece, Italy, and Spain); and 4 trials were 

conducted in the US (1 trial each in Zone 3 (FL), 5 (MI), 6 (TX) and 10 (CA)).

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor to carrots at a total rate of 0.357-0.376 

lb a.i./A (401-423 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.311-2.283 ppm in/ carrot tops and 

<0.01-0.032 ppm in/on roots harvested at a 7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and 

X11721061 were 0.026-0.167 and <0.01-1.043 ppm, respectively in/on tops and <0.01-0.054 and 

<0.01 ppm, respectively, in/on roots at a 7-day PHI. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed critical good agricultural practice (cGAP).

Potatoes

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on potatoes (tubers) from 18 

field trials conducted during the 2008 and 2010 seasons in Europe and NAFTA areas: 8 trials 

were conducted in Europe (4 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, France, Germany, Poland, and the 

UK; and 4 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, France, Greece, Italy, and Spain), and 10 trials were 

conducted in the US and Canada (2 trials in Zone 1 (PA and VA), 1 trial in Zone 2 (GA), 2 trials 

in Zone 5 (MI), 1 trial in Zone 9 (CO), 1 trial in Zone 10 (CA), 2 trials in Zone 11 (ID) and 1 

trial in Zone 14 (MB)). 

Following four foliar directed or broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.355-

0.374 lb a.i./A (399-420 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were below the LOQ (<0.01 ppm) 

in/on potato tubers harvested at a ~7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and 

X11721061 were <0.01-0.022 ppm and <0.01 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 55 of 141

Radish (SC/WDG formulations)

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on radish (roots and tops) 

from six field trials conducted in NAFTA areas during the 2010 season (1 trial in Zone 1 (PA), 2 

trials in Zone 3 (FL), 1 trial in Zone 5 (MI), and two trials in Zone 10 (CA)).

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.360-0.363 lb a.i./A 

(404-407 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.013 ppm in/on radish roots and 0.183-

0.506 ppm in/on radish tops harvested at a 7-day PHI. Respective residues of metabolites 

X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.078 and <0.01 ppm in/on radish roots, and 0.032-

0.418 and 0.032-0.407 ppm in/on radish tops. 

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and 

X11721061 were <0.01-0.016, <0.01-0.075, and <0.01 ppm, respectively, in/on radish roots, and 

0.242-0.465, 0.062-0.783, and 0.141-0.374 ppm, respectively, in/on radish tops.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP. 

In the side-by-side trial with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites were 

generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation.

Sugar beet

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on sugar beets (roots and 

tops) from 13 trials conducted during the 2008 season in Europe and the US: 8 trials were 

conducted in Europe (4 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, France, Germany, Hungary and the UK; 

and 4 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, France, Greece, Italy, and Spain) and 5 trials were 

conducted in the NAFTA: Zone 5 (MI), 7 (NE), 9 (CO), 10 (CA), and 11 (ID)).

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor to sugar beets at a total rate of 0.351-

0.374 lb a.i./A (394-420 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.141-1.685 ppm in/on tops and 

<0.01-0.025 ppm in/on roots harvested at a 7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and 

X11721061, respectively, were 0.029-0.217 and 0.053-0.346 ppm in/on tops and <0.01-0.028 

and <0.01-0.012 ppm in/on roots. We note that the petitioner did not report results for three 

samples of tops harvested from three EU trials at the 7-day PHI (1 sample) and 14-day PHI (2 

samples) because residues were below the LOQ. Based on the residue results for the treated and 

control samples from the 7-day PHI, it appeared that control and treated samples had been 

exchanged in the field; for the 14-day PHI samples it was assumed, based on the nonquantifiable residues, that control samples had been collected in error. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 56 of 141

Leaves of Root and Tuber Vegetable, Crop Group 2

See summaries of the carrot, radish, and sugar beet trials in Root and Tuber Vegetables, above

Bulb Vegetables, Crop Group 3

Onion, bulb

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on bulb onion (whole onion 

bulb with stalk/stems removed) from six field trials conducted during 2008-2009 in the US 

(NAFTA) in Zones 1 (VA; 1 trial), 6 (OK; 1 trial), 8 (TX; 1 trial), 10 (CA; 2 trials), and 11 (ID; 

1 trial).

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.357-0.365 lb a.i./A 

(400-409 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 

below the LOQ (0.01 ppm) in/on bulb onions harvested at a 7-day PHI. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

Onion, green

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on green onions (immature 

bulbs with stalk/stem) from six field trials conducted during 2009 in the US (NAFTA areas) in 

Zones 1 (PA, 1 trial), 2 (GA, 1 trial), 5 (MI, 1 trial), 6 (OK, 1 trial), 10 (CA, 1 trial), and 12 (OR, 

1 trial). 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.360-0.366 lb a.i./A 

(404-410 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.440 ppm in/on green onions harvested 

at a ~7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 0.011-0.332 ppm 

and <0.01-0.088 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

Leafy Vegetables (Except Brassica Vegetables), Crop Group 4

Celery

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on celery (trimmed leaf 

stalk) from six field trials conducted during 2009 in the US (NAFTA areas): 1 trial in Zone 3 

(FL), 1 trial in Zone 5 (MI), and 4 trials in Zone 10 (CA). We note that the raw agricultural 

commodity (RAC) for celery is defined in Table 1 (OCSPP 860.1000) and by OECD as the 

untrimmed leaf stalk (petiole). However, the removal of excessive leaves in the field is 

consistent with agricultural practices and the study protocol. Further, the petiole itself is 

generally considered to be the edible portion. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 57 of 141

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.360-0.361 lb a.i./A 

(404-405 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.058-0.804 ppm in/on celery (trimmed stalks) 

harvested at a ca. 3-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 0.022-

0.097 ppm and <0.01-0.165 ppm, respectively. 

In the tank-mix additive comparison test, following application with no adjuvant or with an OSS 

(Kinetic® at 0.05% v/v) or NIS (X-77 Spreader® at 0.25% v/v) adjuvant, residues were 

generally similar but slightly higher when either type of adjuvant was used. Residues of 

sulfoxaflor in/on celery harvested at a 3-day PHI were 0.058-0.170 ppm (mean 0.105 ppm) 

following applications made without an additive, 0.064-0.212 ppm (mean 0.147 ppm) following 

applications made with an OSS, and 0.076-0.147 ppm (mean 0.124 ppm) following applications 

made with an NIS. Residues of metabolite X11719474 (and mean) were 0.036-0.058 ppm 

(0.044 ppm), 0.059-0.097 ppm (0.070 ppm), and 0.044-0.094 ppm (0.064 ppm) following 

applications made without an adjuvant, with an OSS, and with an NIS, respectively. Residues of 

metabolite X11721061 (and mean) were <0.01 ppm, <0.01 to 0.013 ppm (0.011 ppm), and 

<0.01- 0.015 ppm (0.011 ppm), following applications made without an adjuvant, with an OSS, 

and with an NIS. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. Use of an OSS or NIS adjuvant appears to result in 

a modest increase in residue levels. The one Swiss chard sample was not combined with the 

celery data, because it is not a representative crop. The sulfoxaflor residues on that sample were 

within the range of the celery data.

Head Lettuce

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on head lettuce (heads with 

wrapper leaves) from 14 field trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia, Europe, 

and NAFTA areas. The raw agricultural commodity (RAC) for head lettuce is defined in Table 1 

of OCSPP 860.1000 as fresh head lettuce, with wrapper leaves. Based on the study reports 

and/or the accompanying protocols, lettuce heads with wrapper leaves were collected for all 

trials addressed herein. Residue data for lettuce without wrapper leaves were not submitted.

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.328-0.388 lb a.i./A 

(369-436 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.528 ppm in/on head lettuce harvested at 

a ~3-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.08 ppm and 

<0.01-0.136 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Leaf Lettuce (SC/WDG formulations)

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on leaf lettuce (leaves) from 

18 field trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia, Europe, and the US (NAFTA

areas): 4 trials were conducted in Australia (1 trial each in Queensland, New South Wales, 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 58 of 141

Victoria, and South Australia); 6 trials were conducted in Europe (2 trials in the EU-Northern 

(Germany and the United Kingdom) and 2 trials in the EU-Southern Zone (Greece and Spain)); 

and 8 trials were conducted in the NAFTA (1 trial each in Zone 1 (VA), 2 (GA), and 3 (FL), and 

5 trials in Zone 10 (CA)). 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.342-0.377 lb a.i./A 

(384-424 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.05-3.07 ppm in/on leaf lettuce harvested at a 

~3-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 0.016-0.155 ppm and 

0.03-0.31 ppm, respectively.

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and 

X11721061 were 0.379-0.885, 0.035-0.164, and 0.031-0.056 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

were generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation.

Spinach

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on spinach and Swiss chard 

(also known as silver beet) from eight field trials conducted during the 2008-2010 seasons in 

Australia and the US (NAFTA areas): 2 trials were conducted in Australia (1 trial each in 

Victoria and South Australia), and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial each in NAFTA 

Zone 1 (VA), 2 (GA), 6 (OK), and 9 (CO), and 2 trials in NAFTA Zone 10 (CA)). Seven trials 

were conducted on spinach, and one trial was conducted on Swiss chard. The Swiss chard 

sample was not included in the evaluation of the spinach data and associated tolerance/MRL 

evaluation, because in the US crop group scheme, it is more like celery than spinach.

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.360-0.372 lb a.i./A 

(405-418 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.039-3.256 ppm in/on spinach harvested at a 3-

day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 0.057-0.282 ppm and 

0.019-0.153 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Watercress

Residue chemistry field trial data were not submitted for watercress. Data from leafy 

lettuce/spinach are translated to support use on watercress.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 59 of 141

Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables, Crop Group 5

Broccoli

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on broccoli (head and stem) 

from 15 field trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia, Europe, and the US 

(NAFTA areas). Two trials were conducted in Australia (Queensland and Victoria); 7 trials were 

conducted in Europe (3 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, Germany and the UK; and 4 trials in the 

EU-Southern Zone, France, Greece, and Spain); and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial in 

Zone 6 (OK), 4 trials in Zone 10 (CA), and 1 trial in Zone 12 (OR)).

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.347-0.379 lb a.i./A 

(390-426 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-1.60 ppm in/on broccoli (head and stem) 

harvested at a 3-day PHI; residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.051 

ppm and <0.01-0.090 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP. 

Cabbage

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on cabbage (heads with 

wrapper leaves) from 14 field trials conducted during 2008-2009 in Australia, Europe, and the 

US (NAFTA areas): 2 trials were conducted in Australia (in South Australia and New South 

Wales); 6 trials were conducted in Europe (4 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, in France, 

Germany, Hungary, and United Kingdom; and 2 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, in France and 

Greece); and 6 trials were conducted in the US (one each in Zone 1 (PA), 2 (GA), 3 (FL), 5 (MI), 

6 (TX), and 10 (CA)). 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.341-0.383 lb a.i./A 

(383-430 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.400 ppm in/on cabbage heads with 

wrapper leaves harvested at a ~3-day PHI; residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 

were <0.01-0.06 ppm and <0.01-0.044 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Cauliflower

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on cauliflower from 10 field 

trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia and Europe. Two trials were 

conducted in Australia (Victoria and New South Wales); and 8 trials were conducted in Europe 

(3 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, Germany and the UK; and 5 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, 

France, Greece, and Italy).

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.320-0.373 lb a.i./A 

(360- 419 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.07 ppm in/on cauliflower harvested at a 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 60 of 141

~3-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.03 ppm and 

<0.01-0.02 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Mustard Greens

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on mustard greens (leaves) 

from eight field trials conducted during 2010 in the US (NAFTA areas) in Zones 2 (GA; 2 trials), 

3 (FL; 1 trial), 4 (MO; 1 trial), 5 (MI; 1 trial), 6 (OK; 1 trial) and 10 (CA; 2 trials). 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.354 -0.367 lb a.i./A 

(397-411 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.278-1.17 ppm in/on mustard greens harvested 

at a 2- to 4-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 0.036-0.890

ppm and 0.061-0.897 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried), Crop Group 6

Note: For soybean seed, see the Oilseeds Group (Group 20), below.

Dried shelled beans 

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on dried shelled beans from 

six field trials conducted during 2008 and 2010. Four trials were conducted in Brazil, and two 

trials were conducted in Europe (1 trial each in the EU Northern and Southern Zones, in 

Germany and Spain). (Although the study report (MRID 47832219) also contains data from five 

trials on dry beans conducted in the EU, these trials did not include the target PHI of 7 days and

are not included herein.)

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.350-0.365 lb a.i./A 

(393-411 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.020-0.112 ppm in/on dried beans harvested at 

a 7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.010-0.022 ppm and 

<0.010-0.196 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Succulent edible-podded beans

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on succulent edible-podded 

beans from six field trials conducted during 2008 and 2010 in the Northern and Southern Zones 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 61 of 141

of Europe. Three trials each were conducted in the Northern Zone (Germany, Hungary, and 

Poland) and the Southern Zone (Greece, Italy, and Spain). 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.352-0.372 lb a.i./A 

(395-419 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.024-2.019 ppm in/on edible-podded beans 

harvested at a 7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.010-

0.155 ppm and <0.010-0.228 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Foliage of Legume Vegetable, Crop Group 7

Soybeans (SC/WDG formulations)

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on soybeans (forage and 

hay) from 19 trials conducted during the 2008-2009 seasons in Brazil and the US: 4 trials were 

conducted in Brazil, and 15 trials were conducted in the US (2 trials in NAFTA Zone 2 (GA), 2 

trials in Zone 4 (AR and MS), and 11 trials in Zone 5 (IA, IL, IN, MI, MO, NE, and OH)).

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.178-0.183 lb a.i./A 

(200-205 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor in/on forage harvested at a ~7-day PHI were 0.013-

1.734 ppm. Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.357-

0.371 lb a.i./A (400-416 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.057-1.378 ppm in/on hay. 

Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were, respectively, <0.01-0.264 and 0.112-

1.018 ppm in/on forage, 0.050-3.131 and 0.085-3.379 ppm in/on hay. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

were generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation; neither formulation 

yielded consistently higher residues of sulfoxaflor for any matrix. 

Fruiting Vegetable, Crop Group 8

Tomatoes

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on tomatoes (whole fruit) 

from 44 trials conducted during the 2008-2010 seasons in Australia, Brazil, Europe, and the US: 

6 trials were conducted in Australia (1 trial each in Western Australia and New South Wales, and 

2 trials each in Queensland and Victoria); 4 trials were conducted in Brazil; 22 trials were 

conducted in Europe (10 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Hungary, 

and Poland; and 12 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, France, Greece, Italy, and Spain); and 12 

trials were conducted in the US (1 trial each in NAFTA Zone 1 (VA), 2 (GA), 5 (MI), 2 trials in 

Zone 3 (FL), and 7 trials in Zone 10 (CA)). Four of the EU trials were conducted on tomatoes 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 62 of 141

grown indoors (mid-large size). Of the remaining trials, 10 reflected application to varieties that 

produce small tomatoes, and 30 reflected application to varieties that produce mid-size to large 

tomatoes. 

Following four foliar broadcast or directed applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.317-

0.383 lb a.i./A (356-430 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.762 ppm in/on tomatoes 

(whole fruit) harvested at a 1-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 

were <0.01-0.019 and <0.01-0.026 ppm, respectively, in/on tomatoes. 

Residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites were generally similar in the mid-large tomatoes, small 

tomatoes, and tomatoes grown indoors. Following harvest at a 1-day PHI, residues of 

sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 were <0.01-0.762, <0.01-0.017, and <0.01-0.013 ppm, 

respectively, in/on mid-sized/large tomatoes; 0.020-0.451, <0.01-0.011, and <0.01-0.011 ppm, 

respectively, in/on small tomatoes; and 0.049-0.378, <0.01-0.019, and <0.01-0.026 ppm, 

respectively, in/on tomatoes grown indoors.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP. Residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites were similar in midsize/large tomatoes, small tomatoes, and tomatoes grown indoors. The mode of application 

(directed versus broadcast) does not appear to significantly affect residues levels.

Cucumber

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on cucumber from 18 field 

trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Europe, and NAFTA areas. Twelve trials were 

conducted in Europe (5 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, Germany, Hungary, and Poland; and 7 

trials in the EU-Southern Zone, France, Greece, Italy, and Spain); and 6 trials were conducted in 

the US (2 trials in Zone 2 (GA), 1 trial in Zone 3 (FL), 2 trials in Zone 5 (MI), and 1 trial in and 

Zone 6 (OK)). Note: The cucumber Tier II review included the Australian zucchini trials; 

however, the zucchini samples were not included in the evaluation of the cucumber data and 

associated tolerance/MRL evaluation, because in the US crop group scheme, it is more like 

squash than cucumber.

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.355-0.374 lb a.i./A 

(399-420 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.172 ppm in/on cucumber harvested at a 

1-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.030 ppm and 

<0.01-0.013 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

Peppers

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on peppers (bell/capsicum, 

non-bell/chili’s) from 20 field trials conducted during the 2008-2010 seasons in Australia, 

Europe, and the US (NAFTA areas): 6 trials were conducted in Australia (3 trials in Queensland, 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 63 of 141

2 trials in Victoria, and 1 trial in Western Australia), 6 trials were conducted in Europe (EUSouthern Zone, France, Greece, Italy, and Spain), and 8 trials were conducted in the US (2 trials 

in Zone 2 (GA), 2 trials in Zone 3 (FL), 1 trial in Zone 5 (MI), 1 trial in Zone 8 (TX), and two 

trials in Zone 10 (CA)). An additional US trial conducted in Zone 6 (TX) was lost due to a wind 

storm. The trials included 12 bell pepper and 8 non-bell pepper trials.

Following four foliar directed or broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.321-

0.428 lb a.i./A (361-481 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.46 ppm in/on peppers 

harvested at a 1-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-

0.038 ppm and <0.01-0.06 ppm, respectively. Respective residues in/on non-bell and bell 

peppers at a 1-day PHI were: 0.017-0.46 and <0.01-0.284 ppm for sulfoxaflor, <0.01-0.038 and 

<0.01-0.019 ppm for X11719474, and <0.01-0.06 and <0.01-0.026 ppm for X11721061. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. Residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

X11719474 and X11721061 were generally higher in non-bell peppers than in bell peppers. 

Cucurbit Vegetable, Crop Group 9

Melon

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on melon (whole fruit) from 

16 field trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Brazil, Europe, and the US: 4 trials 

were conducted in Brazil; 6 trials were conducted in Europe (all in the EU-Southern Zone in 

France, Greece, Italy, and Spain); and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial each in Zones 2 

(GA), 5 (MI), and 6 (TX), and 3 trials in Zone 10 (CA)). 

It was noted that samples were harvested at a 0-day PHI in the EU trials associated with study 

CEMS-3965, even though a 1-day PHI was specified in the study protocol. For trials from this 

study, the 1-day PHI samples from the two decline trials (CEMS-3965A, Greece; and CEMS3965B, Spain) were included in data summary calculations, while the 0-day data from the 

remaining two trials were used. 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.356-0.375 lb a.i./A 

(400-421 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.304 ppm in/on melons harvested at a 

~1-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.012 ppm and 

<0.01-0.015 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Squash

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on squash (fruit) from six 

trials conducted in the US (NAFTA areas) during the 2008 and 2009 seasons (1 trial each in 

NAFTA Zone 1 (VA), 2 (GA), 5 (MI), and 10 (CA), and 2 trials in NAFTA Zone 3 (FL). Three 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 64 of 141

trials each were conducted on summer and winter squash. Note: The cucumber Tier II review 

included the Australian zucchini trials; however, since in the US crop group scheme the zucchini 

samples are more like squash than cucumber, there were included in the evaluation of the squash 

tolerance/MRL.

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.357-0.364 lb a.i./A 

(400-408 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.021 ppm in/on squash (fruit) harvested 

at a 1-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.020 ppm and 

<0.01 ppm, respectively. Residues of sulfoxaflor were higher in winter squash (<0.01-0.021 

ppm) and below the LOQ in summer squash, and residues of metabolite X11719474 were higher 

in summer squash (<0.01-0.020 ppm) and below the LOQ in winter squash. Residues of 

sulfoxaflor on zucchini ranged from 0.025–0.1 ppm.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

Citrus Fruit, Crop Group 10

Grapefruit

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on grapefruit from eight 

field trials conducted during 2010 in the US in NAFTA Zones 3 (FL; 5 trials), 6 (TX; 1 trial), 

and 10 (CA; 2 trials). 

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.360 lb a.i./A (404 g 

a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.186 ppm in/on grapefruit harvested at a 1-day PHI. 

Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were each <0.01 ppm. 

In treated grapefruit peel samples at a 1-day PHI, residues of sulfoxaflor ranged from 0.0449 to 

0.8815 ppm, while residues in the pulp were all below the LOQ (<0.01 ppm). Residues of the 

metabolite X11719474 were not detected in any grapefruit pulp or peel sample. Residues of the

metabolite X11721061 were below the LOQ (<0.01 ppm) in all grapefruit pulp samples at a 1-

day PHI.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

Residues appear to be associated with the surface of the fruit at the 1-day PHI.

Lemon

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on lemons from six field 

trials conducted during 2009-2010 in the US (NAFTA areas) in Zones 3 (FL; 1 trial) and 10 

(CA; 5 trials).
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 65 of 141

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.360 lb a.i./A (404 g 

a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.025-0.317 ppm in/on lemons harvested at a 1-day PHI; 

residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were each <0.01 ppm.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Orange

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on orange (whole fruit) 

from 26 field trials conducted during the 2008-2010 seasons in Australia, Brazil, and the USA 

(NAFTA areas). Ten trials were conducted in Australia (5 trials in Queensland, 2 trials each in 

South Australia and New South Wales, and 1 trial in Victoria), 4 trials were conducted in Brazil, 

and 12 trials were conducted in the US (8 trials in NAFTA Zone 3 (FL), 3 trials in Zone 10 (CA), 

and 1 trial in Zone 6 (TX)). 

Following two or four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.263-0.368 lb 

a.i./A (296-413 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.037-0.46 ppm in/on oranges harvested at 

a 1-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.014 ppm and 

≤0.01 ppm, respectively. 

In the tank-mix additive comparison test, residues were similar in/on oranges following 

applications made with an NIS (X-77 Spreader® at 0.05% v/v) or with a COC (Citrus Oil 354® 

at 1% v/v) adjuvant. Residues of sulfoxaflor in/on oranges harvested at a 1-day PHI were 

0.096-0.162 ppm (mean 0.115 ppm) following applications with an NIS and 0.062-0.136 ppm 

(mean 0.103 ppm) following applications made with a COC. Residues of sulfoxaflor in/on 

oranges harvested at a 7-day PHI were 0.038-0.116 ppm (mean 0.089 ppm) following 

applications with an NIS and 0.043-0.144 ppm (mean 0.072 ppm) following applications made 

with a COC. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 in/on oranges harvested at 1 

and 7 days were below the LOQ (<0.01 ppm) following applications made with an NIS or a 

COC.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. Use of a non-ionic surfactant versus a crop oil 

concentrate appears to have no affect on residue levels of sulfoxaflor and its primary metabolites 

in/on oranges. The use of two or four applications did not appear to significantly impact residue 

levels. 

Pome Fruit, Crop Group 11

Apples

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on apples (whole fruit) from 

22 trials conducted in Australia and New Zealand, Europe, and the US (NAFTA areas): 6 trials 

were conducted in Australia and New Zealand during the 2008-2009 season (1 trial each in 

South Australia and New South Wales, and 2 trials each on the North and South Islands of New 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 66 of 141

Zealand), 4 trials were conducted in Europe during the 2008 season (2 trials in the EU-Northern 

Zone, Germany and Poland; and 2 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, Spain and Greece), and 12 

trials were conducted in the US during the 2008 and 2010 seasons (3 trials in Zone 1 (PA), 1 trial 

in Zone 2 (GA), 2 trials in Zone 5 (MI), 1 trial in Zone 9 (UT), 1 trial in Zone 10 (CA), and 4 

trials in Zone 11 (ID, OR, WA)).

Following two or four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.289-0.374 lb 

a.i./A (325-420 g a.i./ha) in Australian/New Zealand, EU, and US trials, residues of sulfoxaflor 

were <0.010-0.297 ppm in/on apples (whole fruit) harvested at a 7-day PHI. Residues of 

metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.010-0.013 ppm and <0.010-0.011 ppm, 

respectively, in/on apples. In the Australia/New Zealand trials, residues of all analytes were 

similar following application of sulfoxaflor at the target seasonal rate, made in either two or four 

applications.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. The use of two or four applications did not appear 

to significantly impact residue levels.

Pears

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on pears (whole fruit) from 

14 trials conducted during the 2008-2010 seasons in Australia, Europe, and NAFTA areas: 2 

trials were conducted in Australia (1 trial each in Victoria and South Australia), 6 trials were 

conducted in Europe (3 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, Germany and Hungary; and 3 trials in 

the EU-Southern Zone, Greece, Spain, and Italy), and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial 

in NAFTA Zone 1 (PA), 2 trials in Zone 10 (CA), and 3 trials in Zone 11 (OR and WA)). 

Following two or four foliar directed or broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 

0.279-0.379 lb a.i./A (314-426 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.044-0.267 ppm in/on 

pears (whole fruit) harvested at a ~7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and 

X11721061 were <0.01-0.01 and <0.01-0.02 ppm, respectively. Maximum residues in the 

Australia trials reflecting applications at ~83% of the target rate were 0.25 ppm following two 

applications and 0.18 ppm following four applications. The petitioner noted that the warmer and 

drier conditions experienced at this site may have contributed to higher residues than would have 

been observed in an “average” season.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. Residues of all analytes were similar following 

application of sulfoxaflor as two or four applications at the same total rate; however, we note that 

the highest residues of sulfoxaflor were observed in the US trial reflecting a concentrated spray 

volume (Trial 04, WA).
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 67 of 141

Stone Fruit, Crop Group 12

Apricots

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on apricots from two field 

trials conducted during 2008 and 2009 in Shepparton, Victoria, Australia and Hastings, Hawkes 

Bay, New Zealand.

Following two or four foliar directed applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.337-0.345 lb 

a.i./A (~379-388 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolite X11721061 were 0.13-0.45 

ppm and <0.010-0.04 ppm respectively in/on apricots harvested at a 7-day PHI. Residues of 

metabolite X11719474 were not detected above the LOQ.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. The use of two applications appeared to have 

increased the residue levels, when compared to making four applications with the same 

maximum seasonal use rate. 

Cherry

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on cherry from 14 field 

trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia and New Zealand, Europe, and the US 

(NAFTA areas): 1 trial each was conducted in Australia (New South Wales) and New Zealand 

(North Island); 6 trials were conducted in Europe (3 trials in the Northern Zone, Germany and 

Hungary; and 3 trials in the Southern Zone, France, Greece, and Spain); and 6 trials were 

conducted in the US (1 trial in Zone 1 (PA); 4 trials in Zone 5 (MI), and 1 trial in Zone 10 (CA)). 

Eight trials were conducted on sweet cherries and six trials were conducted on tart cherries. 

Following two or four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.337-0.365 lb 

a.i./A (379-410 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.26-1.6 ppm in/on cherries harvested at a 

~7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.029 ppm and 

<0.01-0.06 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. The use of two or four applications did not appear 

to significantly impact residue levels. 

Nectarines

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on nectarines (pitted fruit) 

from five trials conducted in Australia (Victoria, 2 trials; New South Wales, 1 trial; and Western 

Australia, 1 trial) and New Zealand (North Island, 1 trial) conducted during the 2008-2009 

seasons.

Following two or four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.341-0.351 lb 

a.i./A (383-394 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.074-0.247 ppm in/on nectarines 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 68 of 141

harvested at a 7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-

0.013 ppm and <0.01-0.021 ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. Residues of all analytes were similar following 

application of sulfoxaflor as two or four applications.

Peach

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on peaches (pitted fruit) 

from 20 trials conducted during the 2008-2010 seasons in Australia, New Zealand, Europe, and 

the US (NAFTA areas): 7 trials were conducted in Australia (3 trials in Victoria, 2 trials in New 

South Wales, and 1 trial each in Western Australia and Queensland), 1 trial was conducted in 

New Zealand (North Island); 6 trials were conducted in Europe (2 trials in the EU-Northern Zone 

(Germany and Hungary); and 4 trials in the EU-Southern Zone (France, Greece, Italy, and 

Spain)); and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial each in Zone 1 (PA), 5 (MI), 6 (TX), and 

10 (CA), and 2 trials in Zone 2 (GA)). 

Following two or four foliar directed or broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 

0.338-0.373 lb a.i./A (380-419 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.636 ppm in/on 

peaches (pitted fruit) harvested at a ~7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and 

X11721061 were <0.01-0.011 and <0.01-0.029 ppm, respectively.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. Residues of all analytes were similar following 

application of sulfoxaflor as two or four applications.

Plums (SC/WDG formulations)

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on plums (pitted fruit) from 

seven field trials conducted during 2009-2010 in Australia and the US (NAFTA areas): 1 trial 

was conducted in Australia (New South Wales), and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial 

each in NAFTA Zones 5 (MI) and 12 (OR), and 4 trials in Zone 10 (CA)). 

Following two foliar directed or broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.342-

0.370 lb a.i./A (384-415 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.021-0.221 ppm in/on plums 

harvested at a 7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were both <0.01-

0.012 ppm. 

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

were generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation; slightly higher 

residues of sulfoxaflor were observed in four of six trials with the WDG formulation, and 

slightly lower or comparable residues were observed in the remaining two trials. In samples 

harvested at a 7-day PHI, residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and X11721061 were 0.014-

0.362, <0.01-0.016, and <0.01 ppm, respectively.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 69 of 141

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

were generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation; slightly higher 

residues of sulfoxaflor were observed in four of six trials with the WDG formulation, and 

slightly lower or comparable residues were observed in the remaining two trials.

Berries Group, Crop Group 13

Grape

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on grapes (fruit) from 33 

field trials conducted during 2008, 2009 and 2010 in Australia, New Zealand, Europe, and the 

USA (NAFTA). Ten trials were conducted in Australia (1 trial each in New South Wales and 

Western Australia; 2 trials in Victoria; and 3 trials each in South Australia and Queensland); 2 

trials were conducted in New Zealand (North Island); 12 trials were conducted in Europe (6 trials 

in the EU-Northern Zone, France, Germany, and Hungary, and 6 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, 

France, Greece, Italy, and Spain); and 9 trials were conducted in the US (2 trials in Zone 1 (PA); 

5 trials in Zone 10 (CA), and 1 trial each in Zones 11 (WA) and 12 (OR)). 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.276-0.390 lb a.i./A 

(310-438 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.01-1.9 ppm in/on grapes harvested at a ~7-day 

PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were <0.01-0.18 ppm and <0.01-0.08 

ppm, respectively. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Strawberry

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on strawberries from 13 

trials conducted during the 2008 and 2009 seasons in Australia, New Zealand, and the US 

(NAFTA): 4 trials were conducted in Australia and New Zealand (1 trial each in South 

Australia, Victoria and Queensland, and 1 trial on the North Island of New Zealand), and 9 trials 

were conducted in the NAFTA (1 trial each in NAFTA Zone 1 (PA), 2 (GA), 3 (FL), 5 (MI), and 

12 (OR), and 4 trials in NAFTA Zone 10 (CA)). 

Following four foliar broadcast or directed applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.339-

0.369 lb a.i./A (381-414 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.02-0.50 ppm in/on strawberries 

harvested at a 1-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were each <0.01-

0.04 ppm in/on strawberries. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 70 of 141

Tree Nuts, Crop Group 14

Almonds

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on almonds (nutmeat and 

hulls) from six field trials conducted during 2008 in NAFTA Zone 10 (CA; 6 trials).

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.355-0.367 lb a.i./A 

(398-411 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor ranged from <LOQ (0.010 ppm) to 0.013 ppm in/on 

almond nutmeat and from 1.04 to 3.12 ppm in/on almond hulls harvested at 7-day PHI. Residues 

of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 0.0272-0.099 ppm and 0.0434-0.152 ppm, 

respectively, in/on almond hulls harvested at 7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 

and X11721061 were not detected above the LOQ in almond nutmeat samples.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. In almond hulls, residues of sulfoxaflor tend to 

decline with increasing PHI; residues of the metabolites remained relatively constant during the 

investigated range of PHIs (21 days maximum).

Pecans

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on pecans (nutmeat) from 

six field trials conducted during 2009 in the US (NAFTA areas) in Zones 2 (GA, 3 trials), 4 (AR, 

1 trial), 6 (OK, 1 trial), and 8 (TX, 1 trial).

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.360-0.363 lb a.i./A 

(404-407 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor and the metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were 

below the LOQ (0.01 ppm) in/on all samples of pecan nutmeat harvested at a 7-day PHI. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Cereal Grain, Crop Group 15

Barley

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on barley (hay, grain, straw, 

and forage) from 27 field trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia and New 

Zealand, Europe, and the US (NAFTA areas): 6 trials were conducted in Australia and New 

Zealand (1 trial each in Queensland and South Australia, 2 trials in New South Wales, and 1 trial 

each in on the North and South Islands of New Zealand); 15 trials were conducted in Europe (7 

trials in the EU-Northern Zone, Germany, Poland, UK; and 8 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, 

France, Italy, Spain, and Greece); and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial in Zone 2 (GA), 

1 trial in Zone 5 (MI), 2 trials in Zone 7 (NE and SD), one trial in Zone 9 (ID), and 1 trial in 

Zone 11 (ID)).
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 71 of 141

Each field trial included one untreated plot and one or two treated plots in which sulfoxaflor, 

formulated as a 240 g ai/L suspension concentrate (SC), was applied to barley as two foliar 

broadcast applications at a target rate of 0.043-0.045 lb a.i./A/application, for a total seasonal 

rate of 0.086-0.090 lb ai/A (96-100 g a.i./ha); separate plots were established for hay and for 

grain and straw in the EU and US trials. In addition, three separate plots were established in two 

EU trials (Germany and Spain) to examine reverse decline in grain and straw; at these plots, 

applications were made earlier in the season to plants at earlier growth stages. Four Australian 

and two New Zealand trials included one or two additional treatment plots which received a 

single application or two applications at ~0.021 lb ai/A/application (~24 g a.i./ha/application); 

results from these plots are not included herein. Applications were made at ~14-day retreatment 

intervals (RTIs) using ground equipment in spray volumes of 10.2-46.3 gal/A (95-433 L/ha). A 

commercial adjuvant (non-ionic/organosilicone surfactant) was added to the spray mixture at 

recommended rates for all applications. Single control and duplicate treated samples of hay were 

harvested at target preharvest intervals (PHIs) of 7 days for hay and 14 days for grain and straw. 

In addition, forage samples were harvested at a target PHI of 7 days from two Australian and one 

New Zealand trial. Barley forage is not considered to be a significant livestock feed item in the 

US and Canada (OCSPP 860.1000, Table 1). 

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.083-0.096 lb a.i./A 

(94-108 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.010-0.643 ppm in/on hay harvested at a ~7-

day PHI, and <0.01-0.37 and <0.01-2.2 ppm in/on grain and straw, respectively, harvested at a 

~14-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were, respectively, <0.010-

0.072 and 0.010-0.522 ppm in/on hay, <0.010-0.018 and <0.010-0.050 ppm in/on grain, and 

<0.010-0.105 ppm and <0.010-0.190 ppm in/on straw. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Wheat (SC/WDG formulations)

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on wheat (forage, hay, 

grain, and straw) from 38 trials conducted during the 2008-2009 season in Australia, New 

Zealand, Brazil, Europe, the USA and Canada: 7 trials were conducted in Australia and New 

Zealand (1 trial each in South Australia, Western Australia, and New South Wales, 2 trials in 

Victoria, and 1 trial each on the North and South Islands of New Zealand), 4 trials were 

conducted in Brazil, 16 trials were conducted in Europe (7 trials in the EU-Northern Zone, 

France, Germany, Poland and the United Kingdom; and 9 trials in the EU-Southern Zone, 

France, Greece, Italy, and Spain), and 11 trials were conducted in the US and Canada (1 trial 

each in NAFTA Zone 2 (GA), 4 (AR), 5A (ON), 6 (TX), and 8 (TX), and 2 trials each in Zone 5 

(MI and NE), 7 (ND and SD), and 14 (MB and SK)).

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.084-0.098 lb a.i./A 

(94-110 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.067 in/on grain. Residues of metabolites 

X11719474 and X11721061 were, respectively, <0.01 and <0.01-0.021 ppm in/on grain.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 72 of 141

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

were generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation in/on all wheat 

matrices. Residues following application of the WDG formulation fell within the range of 

residues observed for the SC formulation, except for sulfoxaflor in straw, in which maximum 

residues were slightly higher for the WDG formulation; overall, neither formulation yielded 

consistently higher residues of sulfoxaflor for any matrix;. Residues of sulfoxaflor, X11719474, 

and X11721061 were 0.041-0.221, <0.01-0.025, and 0.039-0.323 ppm, respectively, in/on 

forage; 0.101-0.167, 0.012-0.037, and 0.123-0.329 ppm, respectively, in/on hay; <0.01-0.063, 

<0.01, and <0.01-0.016 ppm, respectively, in/on grain; and 0.060-1.641, 0.021-0.055, and 0.026-

0.184 ppm, respectively, in/on straw.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP. In the side-by-side trials with the WDG 

formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites were generally similar to those following 

application of the SC formulation. Neither formulation yielded consistently higher residues of 

sulfoxaflor for any matrix. 

Forage, Fodder and Straw of Cereal Grain, Crop Group 16

Barley

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on barley (hay, grain, straw, 

and forage) from 27 field trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia and New 

Zealand, Europe, and the NAFTA area as described above. 

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.083-0.096 lb a.i./A 

(94-108 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.010-0.643 ppm in/on hay harvested at a ~7-

day PHI, and <0.01-2.2 ppm in/on straw, harvested at a ~14-day PHI. Residues of metabolites 

X11719474 and X11721061 were, respectively, <0.010-0.072 and 0.010-0.522 ppm in/on hay, 

and <0.010-0.105 ppm and <0.010-0.190 ppm in/on straw. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

Wheat (SC/WDG formulations)

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on wheat (forage, hay, 

grain, and straw) from 38 trials conducted during the 2008-2009 season in Australia, New 

Zealand, Brazil, Europe, the USA and Canada as described above.

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.084-0.098 lb a.i./A 

(94-110 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-1.4 and 0.024-1.024 ppm in/on forage and 

hay, respectively, harvested at a ~7-day PHI, and 0.030-1.562 ppm in/on straw, harvested at a 

~14-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were, respectively, <0.01-

0.079 and 0.015-0.359 ppm in/on forage, and <0.01-0.364 ppm in/on hay, and <0.01-0.064 and 

0.016-0.203 ppm in/on straw. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were, 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 73 of 141

respectively, <0.01-0.079 and 0.015-0.359 ppm in/on forage, <0.01-0.127 and <0.01-0.364 ppm 

in/on hay, <0.01 and <0.01-0.064 and 0.016-0.203 ppm in/on straw. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP.

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

were generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation. Neither formulation 

yielded consistently higher residues of sulfoxaflor for any matrix.

Oilseed, Crop Group 20

Canola

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on canola/oil seed rape from 

21 field trials conducted in Australia, Europe, and the US and Canada (NAFTA): 4 trials were 

conducted during 2008-2009 in Australia (1 trial each in Victoria, Western Australia, New South 

Wales, and South Australia); 8 trials were conducted in Europe in 2008-2009 and 2010 (5 trials 

in EU-Northern Zone, and 3 trials in EU-Southern Zone); and 9 trials were conducted during 

2008 in the US and Canada (1 trial in Zone 2 (GA), 3 trials in Zone 5 (MI and NE), 2 trials in 

Zone 11 (ID and WA), and 3 trials in Zone 14 (MB, SK, and AB). 

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.078-0.099 lb a.i./A 

(88.1-110.8 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.224 ppm in/on canola seed harvested 

at a ~14-day PHI; residues of metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were, respectively, 

<0.01-0.097 and <0.01-0.04 ppm. In forage and stubble harvested at a ~14-day PHI, residues of 

sulfoxaflor were 0.03-1.5 and 0.02-1.1 ppm, respectively; respective residues of X11719474 and 

X11721061 were 0.01-0.13 and 0.01-0.11 ppm in/on forage, and 0.03-0.11 and 0.02-0.10 ppm 

in/on stubble. 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Cotton

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on cotton seed and gin 

byproducts from 22 field trials conducted during 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Australia, Brazil, 

Europe and the US (NAFTA areas). Four trials were conducted in Australia (2 trials each in 

New South Wales and Queensland); 4 trials were conducted in Brazil; 8 trials were conducted in 

Europe (Southern Zone, Greece and Spain); and 6 trials were conducted in the US (1 trial each in 

Zones 2 (GA), 4 (AR), 6 (OK), and 10 (CA), and 2 trials in Zone 8 (TX)).

The Brazil trials included one additional treatment plot (Treatment 3) reflecting a use pattern not 

sought in Australia, Canada, or USA. These plots received two early-season applications (made 

pre-boll formation) at a 14-day RTI and two late-season applications (starting at boll opening) at 

a 14-day RTI; samples of cotton seed only were harvested at a target 14-day PHI. Data for 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 74 of 141

Treatment 3 are in the Tier II review; however, these results were not included in data summary 

calculations. 

Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.346-0.375 lb a.i./A 

(389-422 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.037-4.20 ppm in/on cotton gin by-products

and <0.01-0.182 ppm in/on undelinted seed harvested at a ~14-day PHI. Residues of metabolite 

X11719474 and X11721061 were, respectively, <0.01-0.250 and <0.01-0.570 ppm in/on gin byproducts, and <0.01-0.020 and <0.01-0.046 ppm in/on seed. 

In the Brazil trials reflecting split season applications at a total rate of 0.344-0.362 lb a.i./A (387-

407 g a.i./ha), residues in cotton seed were generally lower than were observed in the standard 

trials. Residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01-0.020 ppm at a 14-day PHI, while residues of 

metabolites X11719474 and X11721061 were below the LOQ (<0.01 ppm). 

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be 

expected following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use 

pattern is in accord with the proposed cGAP.

Soybean (SC/WDG formulations)

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted field trial data for sulfoxaflor in/on soybeans (forage, hay, 

and seed) from 19 trials conducted during the 2008-2009 seasons in Brazil and the US: 4 trials 

were conducted in Brazil, and 15 trials were conducted in the US (2 trials in NAFTA Zone 2 

(GA), 2 trials in Zone 4 (AR and MS), and 11 trials in Zone 5 (IA, IL, IN, MI, MO, NE, and 

OH)).

Following two foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.178-0.183 lb a.i./A 

(200-205 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor in/on forage harvested at a ~7-day PHI were 0.013-

1.734 ppm. Following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor at a total rate of 0.357-

0.371 lb a.i./A (400-416 g a.i./ha), residues of sulfoxaflor were 0.057-1.378 ppm in/on hay and 

<0.01-0.214 ppm in/on seed harvested at a ~7-day PHI. Residues of metabolites X11719474 and 

X11721061 were, respectively, <0.01-0.264 and 0.112-1.018 ppm in/on forage, 0.050-3.131 and 

0.085-3.379 ppm in/on hay, and <0.01 and <0.01-0.032 ppm in/on seed. 

The petitioner noted that residues in the 13-day PHI seed were higher than expected and 

attributed this to the weather conditions, noting that leaching of residues through the pod or 

breaking of pods due to rain and snow may have resulted in increased exposure of the seed.

Conclusions: The field trials are acceptable and adequately reflect residues that may be expected 

following application of sulfoxaflor per the use pattern used in the study. That use pattern is in 

accord with the proposed cGAP. The submitted residue data support two applications to soybean 

forage.

In the side-by-side trials with the WDG formulation, residues of sulfoxaflor and metabolites 

were generally similar to those following application of the SC formulation; neither formulation 

yielded consistently higher residues of sulfoxaflor for any matrix.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 75 of 141

Processed Food and Feed (860.1520)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7: Residue data

The effect of household processing and hydrolysis on aqueous samples containing 14Csulfoxaflor, 14C-X11719474, and 14C-X11721061 was also studied. Radiolabeled compounds 

were added at a concentration of 1 mg/L to vials of citric acid buffer prepared at a target pHs of 

4, 5, and 6. The pH 4, 5, and 6 vials were subjected to hydrolysis at temperatures of 90, 100, and 

120oC, respectively, for at least 20 minutes. Sulfoxaflor and X11721061 were stable to 

hydrolysis during this testing. The compound X11719474 was stable to hydrolysis at pH 4 and 

90 oC for 20 minutes, but was degraded to some extent with increased pH and temperature, with 

formation of one degradate, X11579457, accounting for approximately 3.8% and 11.6% of the 

total radioactivity when boiled at 100°C for 60 minutes (pH 5) and steamed at 120°C for 20 

minutes (pH 6), respectively. Typical food processing such as baking, boiling and canning are 

unlikely to significantly affect the nature and magnitude of sulfoxaflor residues.

Table 30: Identification of Radioactivity in Hydrolyzed Buffered Water*.

Analyte 14C-sulfoxaflor 14C-X11719474 14C-X11721061

pH 4 pH 5 pH 6 pH 4 pH 5 pH 6 pH 4 pH 5 pH 6

Sulfoxaflor 99.6 100.0 100.4 - - - - - -

X11719474 - - - 99.0 96.9 89.1 - - -

X11721061 - - - - - - 100.0 99.9 99.7

X11579457 - - - 0.4 3.8 11.6** - - -

Accountability 99.6 100.0 100.4 99.4 100.7 100.7 100.0 99.9 99.7

*Only the pH is reported in this table. **Confirmed by LC/MS/MS.

Processing studies were conducted on apple, barley, cabbage, canola, carrot, cherry, cotton, 

grapes, head lettuce, leaf lettuce, onions, oranges, potato, soybean, strawberry, sugar beet, 

tomato, and wheat. The results are summarized in Table 31.

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Apple

Apple Fruit 

RAC 

(prior to 

processing)

*

0.716

(802.2) 7

0.343 0.030 (0.009) -- -- --

Washed 

apples 0.246 0.018 0.010 0.7x 0.6x 1.0x

Apple sauce 0.202 0.020 (0.009) 0.6x 0.7x NC

Juice 0.128 (0.009) (0.005) 0.4x 0.3x NC

Wet 

pomace

0.365 0.034 0.016 1.1x 1.1x 1.6x

Dry pomace 1.431 0.143 0.051 4.2x 4.8x 5.1x
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 76 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Canned 

apples (0.0098) ND (0.003) 0.03x 0.3x NC

Dried 

apples 0.118 (0.009) 0.018 0.3x 0.3x 1.8x

*Note: Apple fruit RAC samples analyzed after collection had similar residues (0.362 ppm, 0.028 ppm, and 

0.009 ppm) to RAC samples analyzed prior to processing.

Barley

Grain prior 

to 

processing*

0.277

(311.7) 16

0.174 0.014 0.055 -- -- --

Pearl barley 0.130 0.012 0.037 0.7x 0.9x 0.7x

Pot barley 0.152 0.013 0.055 0.9x 0.9x 1.0x

Bran 0.167 0.018 0.071 1.0x 1.3x 1.3x

Flour 0.132 0.010 0.016 0.8x 0.7x 0.3x

Cleaned 

barley 0.165 0.019 0.062 0.9x 1.4x 1.1x

Brewing 

malt 0.163 0.016 0.041 0.9x 1.1x 0.7x

Malt 

sprouts 0.224 0.030 0.039 1.3x 2.1x 0.7x

Beer 0.029 0.011 0.013 0.2x 0.8x 0.2x

Spent grains 0.029 (0.003) 0.020 0.2x 0.7x 0.4x

Brewer’s

yeast 0.026 ND 0.012 0.1x 0.7x 0.2x

*Note: Barley RAC samples analyzed after collection had similar residues (0.16 ppm, 0.014 ppm, and 0.041 ppm) to RAC samples

analyzed prior to processing.

Cabbage

Heads 

(upon 

collection 

of field 

samples) g

0.734

(824) 3

0.429 0.089 0.035 -- -- --

Heads prior 

to 

processing

(inc. 

wrapper 

leaves)

0.180 0.065 0.016 -- -- --

Inner leaves 0.014 0.025 ND 0.1x 0.4x 0.6x
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 77 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Outer 

(wrapper) 

leaves

0.322 0.126 0.030 1.8x 1.9x 1.9x

Cooked 

head (0.009) (0.009) (0.003) 0.1x 0.2x 0.6x

Cooking 

liquid (0.007) (0.007) (0.005) 0.1x 0.2x 0.6x

Sauerkraut 0.017 0.028 ND 0.1x 0.4x 0.6x

Sauerkraut 

juice 0.013 0.024 ND 0.1x 0.4x 0.6x

*Note: These values are not used in calculation of the processing factor. The cabbage RAC was stored under “cool” 

conditions prior to processing, and was not kept in frozen storage.

Oil seed, 

rape/

Taurus

Seeds prior 

to 

processing

0.264

(296.4) 14

0.033 (0.004) (0.006) -- -- --

Cleaned 

seeds 0.037 ND (0.007) 1.1x NC NC

Meal 0.063 (0.006) (0.009) 1.9x NC NC

Crude oil ND ND ND 0.3x NC NC

Refined oil ND ND ND 0.3x NC NC

Solventextracted 

meal

0.072 (0.008) (0.009) 2.2x NC NC

NC = Not calculated because residues were not detected above the LOQ in the RAC and processed fraction.

Canola RAC samples analyzed after collection had similar residues (0.038 ppm, ND, and <LOQ) to RAC samples analyzed 

prior to processing.

Carrot Carrot root 

(RAC)

1.092

(1,224)

7 0.0101 ND ND -- -- --

Washed and 

peeled root

(0.0082)

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

<1.0x NC NC

Cooked 

carrot

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

<1.0x NC NC

Cooking 

liquid

0.0130

(0.0085)

Avg. 0.012

ND

ND

ND

ND

1.1x NC NC

Carrot juice 0.0234

0.0246

Avg. 0.0240

(0.0039)

(0.0048)

ND

ND

2.4x NC NC

Canned 

carrot

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

<1.0x NC NC

NC = Not calculated; residues were below the LOQ (<0.01 ppm) in both RAC and processed fraction for metabolites.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 78 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Cherry

Whole 

cherries*

(RAC) 

(prior to 

processing)

0.715

(803) 7

0.765 0.023 0.033 -- -- --

Washed 

cherries 0.648 0.026 0.026 0.8x 1.1x 0.8x

Canned 

cherries 0.737 0.043 0.044 1.0x 1.9x 1.3x

Juice 0.653 0.022 0.040 0.9x 1.0x 1.2x

Jam 0.838 0.031 0.048 1.1x 1.3x 1.5x

Dried 

cherries 3.950 1.572 0.384 5.2x 68x 12x

*Cherry fruit RAC samples analyzed after collection had similar residues (0.616 ppm, 0.035 ppm, and 0.039 ppm) to RAC 

samples analyzed prior to processing.

Cotton

Seed (RAC)

1.08

(1,213) 15

0.1001 ND 0.0469 -- -- --

Aspirated 

seed 

fractions

2.3197 0.1230 0.1703 23x 12x 4x

Delinted 

seed 0.0983 ND 0.0455 1.0x NC 1.0x

Hulls 0.1846 (0.0074) 0.0457 1.8x NC 1.0x

Meal 0.0822 (0.0058) 0.0553 0.8x NC 1.2x

Meal press 

cake 0.0781 ND 0.0471 0.8x NC 1.0x

Crude oil (0.0059) ND 0.258 <0.1x NC 5.5x

Refined oil ND ND ND <0.1x NC <0.2x

Control specimens were collected and analyzed. No residues were detected in the unfortified control samples except in 

aspirated seed fractions, where detectable residues of 0.1728, 0.0165, and 0.0217 ppm for sulfoxaflor, X11719474, and 

X11721061, respectively, were observed. NC = Not calculated; residues were below the LOQ in both the RAC and 

processed fractions.

Grape/

Pinot Noir

RAC

(prior to 

processing)

0.739

(830) 7

0.243 0.054 0.018 -- -- --

Raisins 0.856 0.285 0.066 3.5x 5.3x 3.7x

Juice 0.164 0.043 (0.008) 0.7x 0.8x <0.6x
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 79 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Wine 

bottled 0.171 0.056 0.010 0.7x 1.0x 0.6x

Pomace 0.237 0.078 0.030 1.0x 1.4x 1.7x

Head 

Lettuce

Heads with 

wrapper 

leaves

(RAC; prior 

to 

processing)

0.748

(837.9) 3

0.592 0.100 0.106 -- -- --

Wrapper 

leaves 0.593 0.132 0.229 1.0X 1.3X 2.2X

Unwashed 

heads 

without 

wrapper 

leaves

0.354 0.086 0.059 0.6X 0.9X 0.6X

Washed 

heads

0.146 0.025 0.016 0.2X 0.3X 0.2X

Washings 0.045 (0.004) (0.006) 0.1X <0.1X <0.1X

Head lettuce RAC samples analyzed after collection had similar residues (0.507 ppm, 0.081 ppm, and 0.07 ppm) to RAC 

samples analyzed prior to processing.

Leaf 

Lettuce

Unwashed 

lettuce 

(RAC; prior 

to 

processing) 0.728

(818) 3

0.654 0.243 0.115 -- -- --

Washed 

lettuce 0.488 0.210 0.129 0.7x 0.9x 1.1x

Washings 0.159 0.026 ND 0.2x 0.1x <0.1x

Onion

Whole 

onion 

(RAC)

1.09

(1,225) 7

ND ND ND -- -- --

Peeled 

onion ND ND ND NC NC NC

Dried onion ND ND ND NC NC NC

Orange

(Valencia)

Pulp RAC*

1.79

(2.00) 1

(0.0039) ND ND -- -- --

Peel RAC* 0.3661 0.0143 (0.0065) -- -- --

Whole 

orange 

RAC*

(peel +pulp)

0.0625 (0.0049) (0.0036) -- -- --
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 80 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Juice (0.0042) ND ND <0.2X NC NC

Wet pulp 0.1567 (0.0062) (0.0085) 2.5X NC NC

Dried pulp 0.5159 0.0193 0.0225 8.3X >1.9X >2.3X

Peel 0.5714 0.0256 0.0156 9.1X >2.6X >1.6X

Oil ND ND ND <0.2X NC NC

Marmalade ND ND ND <0.2X NC NC

Canned 

slices ND ND ND <0.2X NC NC

*Oranges were separated into peel and pulp prior to analysis. Processing factors were calculated using the whole 

orange RAC (peel + pulp) residues, which were calculated by the study reviewer as the sum of the peel and pulp 

residues, adjusted for the individual weights of the fractions.

Potato 

(Kuras)

Potato 

tubers*

(RAC)

1.05

(1,176) 7

0.012 0.043 (0.009) -- -- --

Washed 

potatoes 0.014 0.059 (0.008) 1.2X 1.4X NC

Peeled 

potatoes 0.019 0.069 (0.009) 1.6X 1.6X NC

Peel 0.022 0.109 0.013 1.8X 2.5X >1.3X

Potato 

flakes 0.030 0.100 (0.008) 2.5X 2.3X NC

Microwaved 

potatoes

0.013 0.042 (0.007) 1.1X 1.0X NC

Boiled 

potatoes 0.012 0.042 (0.005) 1.0X 1.0X NC

Cooking 

water (0.006) 0.021 (0.005) <0.8X 0.5X NC

Potato chips 0.025 0.106 (0.005) 2.1X 2.5X NC

Dried 

potatoes 0.043 0.184 0.017 3.6X 4.3X >1.7X

French fries 0.019 0.052 ND 1.6X 1.2X NC

*Unpeeled and unwashed; sampled just prior to processing.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 81 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Soybean

Seed (RAC)

1.10

(1,236) 7

0.0727 ND 0.0134 -- -- --

AGF 6.8871* 0.3256* 0.4296* 95X 33x 32X

Meal 0.0964 (0.0052) 0.0246 1.3X NC 1.8X

Hulls 0.1079 ND 0.0156 1.5X NC 1.2X

Pressed 

cake 0.0793 (0.0034) 0.0157 1.1X NC 1.2X

Expeller 

crude oil 0.0220 ND (0.0067) 0.3X NC <0.7X

Solventextracted 

crude oil

0.0203 ND ND 0.3X NC <0.7X

Refined oil ND ND ND <0.1X NC <0.7X

*Results are the mean of re-analysis.

Strawberry

Unwashed 

strawberry

0.724

(812) 1

0.2003 0.0124 (0.0084) -- -- --

Washed 

strawberry

0.1670

0.1859

[0.1765]

(0.0076)

0.0143

[0.0122]

(0.0060)

(0.0058)

[0.0059]

0.9X 1.0X NC

Juice

0.0498

0.0564

[0.0531]

(0.0050)

(0.0048)

[0.0049]

ND

ND 0.3X <0.8X NC

Canned

strawberry

0.1215

0.1180

[0.1198]

0.0113

(0.0097)

[0.0107]

(0.0071)

(0.0072)

[0.0072]

0.6X 0.9X NC

Jam

0.0830

0.0702

[0.0766]

(0.0076)

(0.0068)

[0.0072]

(0.0044)

(0.0038)

[0.0041]

0.4X <0.8X NC

Samples were analyzed in duplicate; average residues are bolded and reported in brackets. Residues <LOQ were assigned 

a value of 0.01 ppm when averaged with a detectable residue.

Sugar beet

Sugar beet 

root (RAC;

(prior to 

processing)

1.06

(1,191) 7

0.013 0.021 ND -- -- --

Pulp (0.005) (0.006) ND <0.8x <0.5x NC

Press water (0.006) (0.007) ND <0.8x <0.5x NC

Raw juice 0.018 0.023 (0.006) 1.4x 1.1x NC
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 82 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Thin juice 0.014 0.027 ND 1.1x 1.3x NC

Lime sludge (0.010) 0.023 ND <0.8x 1.1x NC

Thick juice 0.061 0.126 ND 4.7x 6.0x NC

Raw sugar 0.023 0.048 ND 1.8x 2.3x NC

White sugar (0.006) 0.011 ND <0.8x 0.5x NC

Molasses 0.135 0.281 ND 10x 13x NC

Dried pulp 0.039 0.044 ND 3.0x 2.1x NC

Tomato

Tomato 

RAC

0.719

(807.8) 1

0.119 0.012 (0.009) -- -- --

Fruit, 

washed and 

peeled

0.141 0.014 0.013 1.2X 1.2X >1.3X

Juice 0.117 0.015 (0.009) 1.0X 1.3X NC

Canned 0.093 0.015 0.014 0.8X 1.3X >1.4X

Ketchup 0.250 0.029 0.017 2.1X 2.4X >1.7X

Puree 0.235 0.022 0.016 2.0X 1.8X >1.6X

Paste 0.518 0.060 0.034 4.4X 5.0X >3.4X

Wheat

Wheat 

Grain 

(RAC)

0.444

(499) 15

0.0650 0.0130 0.0276 -- -- --

Aspirated 

Grain 

Fraction

1.3817 0.2892 0.3625 21X 22X 13X

Total bran 0.0230 ND 0.0190 0.4X <0.8X 0.7X

Germ 0.0307 ND 0.0399 0.5X <0.8X 1.4X

Bran 0.0279 ND 0.0223 0.4X <0.8X 0.8X

Middlings 0.0109 ND ND 0.2X <0.8X <0.4X

Shorts 0.0132 ND ND 0.2X <0.8X <0.4X
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 83 of 141

Table 31. Residue data from processing studies with Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208)

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb a.i./A

(g a.i./ha)

PHIa 

(day)

Residues (ppm) b,c,d Processing Factore

XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061 XDE-208 X11719474 X11721061

Whole meal 

flour 0.0136 ND 0.0135 0.2X <0.8X 0.5X

Refined 

white flour (0.0079) ND ND <0.2X <0.8X <0.4X

Whole grain 

bread (0.0091) ND (0.0064) <0.2X <0.8X <0.4X

White bread (0.0046) ND ND <0.2X <0.8X <0.4X

Gluten ND ND ND <0.2X <0.8X <0.4X

Gluten feed 

meal (0.0073) ND ND <0.2X <0.8X <0.4X

Starch ND ND ND <0.2X <0.8X <0.4X

a PHI = Preharvest Interval. ND = Non Detectable where residues were below the limit of detection (<LOD). LOD = 0.003 

ppm. b Residue values in parenthesis are <LOQ but >LOD. The LOQ was 0.010 ppm and the LOD was 0.003 ppm. c Control specimens were collected and analyzed. No residues were detected for the unfortified control samples nor were any 

analytical interferences present in any untreated control sample. d Processing factors were calculated using the equation: Processing Factor = [Measured residue for analyte in the processed 

fraction] / [Measured residue for analyte in the RAC prior to processing]. Residues <LOQ and ND were assigned a value of 

0.01 ppm for calculation purposes. e NC = Not calculated because residues were not detected above the LOQ in the RAC and processed fraction.

Conclusions. The processing studies that were submitted are acceptable, with the exception of 

one of the wheat processing studies for which a replacement study was submitted and is 

summarized in Table 31. They were performed in accordance with the OECD guidance and can 

be used in the dietary risk assessment and for evaluating the tolerances/MRLs for processed 

commodities.

Confined Accumulation in Rotational Crops (Field; 860.1850)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7: Residue data

14C-sulfoxaflor was applied to bare sandy loam soil in California, at a nominal rate of 600 g 

a.i./ha. Radishes (cherry belle), lettuce (butter crunch), and wheat (summit) were planted after 

aging for the following plant back intervals (PBIs): 30, 120, and 365 days. Immature and mature 

radishes, immature and mature lettuce, wheat forage, wheat hay (fresh cut and dry cut), and 

mature wheat grain and straw were harvested at each PBI.

The respective TRRs in immature radish tops, mature radish tops, and mature radish roots were 

1.383, 1.259, and 0.156 ppm for 30 day PBI; 0.458, 0.500, and 0.088 ppm for the 120 day PBI; 

and 1.785, 1.239, and 0.061 ppm for the 365 day PBI. X11719474 comprised the major residue 

in all radish matrices at all PBIs (46.8-88.5 % TRR; 0.071-0.993 ppm). Sulfoxaflor was not 

detected in mature radish roots, but was found in immature and mature radish tops at all PBIs 

(0.9-3.2 % TRR; 0.008-0.040 ppm). The glucose conjugate of X11721061, the glucose plus 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 84 of 141

malonyl conjugate of X11721061, X11721061, X11579457, and X11519540 were found in 

immature and mature radish tops at < 7.0 % TRR (<0.13 ppm) at all PBIs, expect for X11721061 

which was not detected at the 120 day PBI. 

The respective TRRs in immature and mature lettuce were 1.713 and 0.743 ppm for the 30 day 

PBI; 0.584 and 0.505 ppm at the 120 day PBI; and 0.841 and 0.383 ppm for the 365 day PBI. 

X11719474 comprised the major residue in immature and mature lettuce at all PBIs (47.7-68.8 % 

TRR; 0.183-0.817 ppm). Sulfoxaflor was not detected in mature lettuce at the 120 day PBI, but 

was found in all other lettuce samples (<~2 % TRR; ≤0.03 ppm). The glucose conjugate of 

X11721061, the glucose plus malonyl conjugate of X11721061, X11721061, X11579457, and 

X11519540 were found in immature and mature lettuce (<~7.5 % TRR; <0.08 ppm), except for 

X11721061 was not detected in immature lettuce at the 120 day PBI. 

The respective TRRs in wheat forage, hay, straw, and grain were 1.472, 1.255, 2.047, and 0.077 

ppm for the 30 day PBI; 0.260, 2.634, 3.805, and 0.081 ppm for the 120 day PBI; and 0.218, 

1.137, 0.708, and 0.019 ppm for the 365 day PBI. X11719474 comprised the major residue in all 

matrices (39.5-68.4 % TRR; 0.013-1.504 ppm). Sulfoxaflor was not detected in wheat grain at 

any PBI, in hay at the 365 day PBI, and in forage at the 120 and 365 day PBIs. The glucose 

conjugate of X11721061, the glucose plus malonyl conjugate of X11721061, X11721061, 

X11579457, and X11519540 were found in all wheat matrices at all PBIs (~≤6 %; ≤0.20 ppm), 

except in wheat grain where levels were not detected at any PBI and in 120 day wheat forage 

where X11519540 was not detected. Sulfoxaflor was taken up as pectin, lignin, hemicellulose, 

and cellulose in samples of wheat forage, hay, and straw where further bound residue 

determinations were conducted.

Conclusions. Metabolism of sulfoxaflor in rotated crops is understood and is similar to that of 

primary crops. Furthermore, this confined crop rotation study shows that a field accumulation 

study is needed to establish PBIs and possibly MRLs in rotated crops.

X11719474 is the predominant residue observed in rotational crops. However, field rotational 

crop studies demonstrate that the maximum amount of X11719474 taken up by succeeding crops 

is similar to the maximum amount present in primary crops after foliar treatments. As these 

summed levels of X11719474 are still low relative to the amount of parent sulfoxaflor in most 

primary crops, risk assessments based on parent sulfoxaflor will be protective for any 

X11719474 residues taken up by rotational crops. An exception to the preceding generalization 

regarding relative metabolite levels was noted for the root and tuber vegetables. However, for 

these crops, the maximum residue levels are low (<0.04 ppm). Thus, a separate residue of 

concern definition for rotational root and tuber vegetable crops was not considered necessary. 

Also, because there are few potential rotational crops that are not proposed for primary crop 

tolerances, concerns regarding rotational crop issues are low. Based on the above considerations 

combined with its substantially lower toxicity relative to sulfoxaflor, X11719474 is excluded 

from the residue definition. For tolerance enforcement, parent sulfoxaflor is considered an 

adequate indicator of misuse for the proposed application methods. Should there ever be soil 

directed applications of sulfoxaflor to primary crops, there is a potential for significant residues 

of X11719474 in rotated crops, requiring this decision to be revisited.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 85 of 141

Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops (Field; 860.1900)

Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208, GF-2032/GF-2372), OECD Joint Review Project, Section B7: Residue data

Dow AgroSciences, LLC submitted limited field rotational crop data for sulfoxaflor in/on a root 

crop (radish roots and tops), leafy vegetable (mustard green leaves), cereal grain (sorghum 

forage, stover, and grain), and grass (forage and hay) from two field trials conducted during 

2008-2009 in NAFTA Zones 2 (GA) and 10 (CA). Rotational crops were planted after a primary 

crop of spinach (GA) or carrot (CA) in 2008, or leaf lettuce (both sites) in 2009. The plots 

treated in 2008 were used for the targeted 180-day plant back interval (PBI), and the plots treated 

in 2009 were used for the remaining PBIs (30, 90, and 295 or 361 days).

Each field trial included two treated plots in which sulfoxaflor, formulated as a 240 g a.i./L 

suspension concentrate (SC), was applied to the primary crop as four foliar broadcast 

applications at a target rate of 0.09 lb a.i./A/application, for a total seasonal rate of 0.36 lb a.i./A. 

The applications were made at target 7-day retreatment intervals (RTIs) using ground equipment 

(spray boom) in spray volumes of 20.7-30.7 gal/A. A commercial adjuvant (organosilicone/nonionic surfactant) was added to the spray mixture at recommended rates for all applications. 

Spinach, carrots, and lettuce (primary crops) were harvested from each plot at a preharvest 

interval (PHI) of 3 days. Rotational crops of radish, mustard greens, sorghum, and grass were 

planted at targeted PBIs of ~30, 90, 180, and 270-365 days.

The petitioner noted that the spinach and carrots were treated in connection with magnitude of 

the residue (MOR) studies; residue results for these crops are not reported herein. It was further 

noted that lettuce from the GA plot had matured beyond bolting (i.e., beyond commercial 

maturity) at harvest.

Single control and duplicate treated samples of rotational crops were harvested at maturity at 

each PBI. Samples of sorghum stover and grain were not collected from the CA trial at the 361-

day PBI because the crop failed to mature due to poor weather conditions.

In rotational crop commodities, residues of sulfoxaflor were <0.01 in/on all commodities at all 

PBIs, except for two samples showing trace residues (between the LOQ and LOD) and the 124-

day radish tops sample from the CA trial. In the radish tops sample, residues were 0.023 ppm; 

the petitioner noted that apparent residues of 0.055 ppm sulfoxaflor were also observed in the 

corresponding control sample.

Metabolite X11719474 was identified in most rotational crop commodities and was the major

residue component. In general, residues declined with increasing PBI, except in grass hay. 

Metabolite X11719474 was the only identified residue in radish roots, at <0.01-0.031 ppm at the 

30-day PBI and <0.01-0.011 ppm at the 90- and 124-180-day PBIs. Quantifiable residues of 

metabolite X11719474 were observed at all PBIs in/on radish tops, mustard greens, and grass 

hay: respective residues at the 30- and 361-day PBIs were 0.027-0.364 and 0.015-0.032 ppm for 

radish tops; 0.040-0.292 and 0.013-0.020 ppm for mustard greens; and <0.01-0.030 and <0.01-

0.033 ppm for grass hay. Quantifiable residues were observed at the 30-, 90-, and 180-day PBIs 

in sorghum and grass forage; respective residues at the three PBIs were 0.012-0.030, <0.01-
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 86 of 141

0.022, and <0.01-0.044 ppm for sorghum forage, and 0.013-0.054, <0.01-0.038, and 0.014-0.024 

ppm for grass forage.

Quantifiable residues of metabolite X11721061 were observed in/on: 30-day radish tops (<0.01-

0.025 ppm); 30- and 180-day mustard greens (<0.01-0.027 and <0.01-0.014 ppm, respectively); 

180-day sorghum forage (<0.01-0.014 ppm); and 90-day grass forage (<0.01-0.012 ppm). 

Residues were below the LOQ in/on all remaining rotated crop commodities.

The highest residues of soil metabolite X11519540 were observed in 180-day radish tops at 

<0.01-0.035 ppm; residues were <0.01 to ≤0.016 ppm in/on 30-day radish tops, 30 and 180-day 

mustard greens, 90-day grass forage, and 90- and 180-day grass hay. Residues were below the 

LOQ in/on all remaining rotated crop commodities.

Quantifiable residues of soil metabolite X11579457 were observed in/on: 30-, 90-, and 180-day 

radish tops at <0.01-0.026, <0.01-0.013, and <0.01-0.019 ppm, respectively; 30- and 90-day 

mustard greens at <0.01-0.024 and <0.01-0.010 ppm, respectively; 30-, 90-, and 180-day 

sorghum forage at <0.01-0.010, <0.01-0.011, and <0.01-0.024 ppm; 30- and 90-day grass forage 

at <0.01-0.013 and <0.01-0.025 ppm, respectively; and 90-, 180-, and 361-day grass hay at 

<0.01-0.026, <0.01-0.027, and <0.01-0.011 ppm, respectively. In general residues tended to 

decline with increasing PBI. Residues were below the LOQ in/on all remaining rotated crop 

commodities.

Conclusions: The supervised residue trials on rotated crops are considered fully reliable. Based 

on the study results, residues of sulfoxaflor are not expected to accumulate above the LOQ in 

root, leafy vegetable, cereal grain, or grass commodities planted at PBIs of 30, 90, 180, or 295-

361 days following four foliar broadcast applications of sulfoxaflor formulated as a 240 g/L SC, 

at a total rate of 0.360-0.363 lb a.i./A to primary crops.

The proposed 30-day plant back interval is considered adequate, and HED notes that there are 

only a few commodities that are not proposed for registration that could be rotational crop

options.

Samples were analyzed for sulfoxaflor and metabolites using an acceptable method. The study is 

supported by adequate storage stability data. The method was adequately validated prior to and 

in conjunction with the analysis of the field trial samples. The validated limit of quantitation 

(LOQ) was 0.010 ppm, and the reported limit of detection (LOD) was 0.003 ppm for each 

analyte in/on all matrices.

Tolerance Derivation

The OECD MRL calculation procedures were used to determine the MRLs for all commodities. 

The three countries participating in this joint review, Australia, Canada, and the U.S., all agreed 

to use the OECD MRL calculation procedures to determine recommended MRLs. The 

procedures generate MRLs based on mean field trial values. As a result, the means of the two 

samples taken at each trial site were used to arrive at the recommended MRLs. For crop groups, 

the MRL was set at the highest MRL for a representative commodity of that group. The 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 87 of 141

individual spreadsheets for the various commodities can be found in Appendix 4, while the 

worksheets for crop groups can be found in Appendix 5.

Appendix 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor

Appendix 2. Field Trial Geographic Representation 

Appendix 3. Summary Table of NAFTA and European Field Trial Data

Appendix 4. Field Trial Data and OECD MRL Calculator Output

Appendix 5. Individual MRLs for Representative Commodities and Crop Group MRLs

Appendix 6. Chemical Structures of Important Metabolites Identified in Metabolism Studies and 

Analyzed in Field Trials and Livestock Feeding Studies
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 88 of 141

Bibliography

860.1300 Nature of the residue -plants, livestock 

47832032 Rotondaro, S.; Balcer, J.; Smith, K. (2010) A Nature of the Residue Study with Carbon 14-

XR-208 Applied to Rice: (Amended Report). Project Number: 070034/OCR. Unpublished 

study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC, Research for Hire and ABC Laboratories, Inc. 

166 p.

47832075 Hastings, M.; Rotondaro, S.; Baker, J. (2010) A Nature of the Residue Study with 

[(Carbon 14)]-XR-208 Applied to Peas. Project Number: 070035/OCR, 070035. 

Unpublished study prepared by Research for Hire, Dow AgroSciences, LLC and ABC 

Laboratories, Inc. 144 p. 

47832079 Liu, D.; Adelfinskaya, Y. (2010) A Nature of the Residue Study in the Laying Hen with 

[Carbon 14]-X11719474, a Metabolite of XDE-208. Project Number: 090078, 090078/OCR. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC and Southwest Bio-Labs, Inc. 113 

p. 

47832080 Becker, J. (2010) A Nature of the Residue Study in the Ruminant with (Carbon 14)-XDE208. Project Number: 080005. Unpublished study prepared by Southwest Bio-Labs, Inc. 140 

p. 

47832084 Rotondaro, S. (2010) A Nature of the Residue Study in the Ruminant with [Carbon 14]-

X11719474, Metabolite of XDE 208. Project Number: 090066. Unpublished study prepared 

by Southwest Bio-Labs, Inc. 129 p.

47832225 Rotondaro, S. (2010) A Nature of the Residue Study with (carbon 14) -XDE-208 Applied to 

Tomatoes: Amended Report. Project Number: 070021, 22109/5051/1, R050708. Unpublished 

study prepared by Dow AgroSciences LLC and Research for Hire and ABC Laboratories, 

Inc. 151 p. 

47832226 Graper, L.; Smith, K. (2010) A Nature of the Residue Study with (carbon 14)-XR-208 

Applied to Lettuce. Project Number: 070033, 22109/5051/2, R050707. Unpublished study 

prepared by Dow AgroSciences LLC and Research for Hire and ABC Laboratories, Inc. 148 

p. 

47832227 Rotondaro, S. ; Smith, K. (2009) A Nature of the Residue Study in the Laying Hen with 

14C-XDE-208. Project Number: 080006, 008/01027. Unpublished study prepared by Dow

AgroSciences LLC and Southwest Bio-Labs, Inc. 115 p.

860.1340 Residue analytical method

47832030 Rodrigues, A. (2010) Residue Method Validation for the Determination of XDE-208 and its 

Major Metabolites (X11719474 and X11721061) in Agricultural Commodities and Processed 

Products using On-Line Solid-Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography with Tandem 

Mass Spectrometry Detection. Project Number: 091031/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by 

Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 88 p. 

47832031 Rodrigues, A. (2010) Enforcement Method for the Determination of Sulfoxaflor (XDE208) and its Main Metabolites in Agricultural Commodities using Offline Solid-Phase 

Extraction and Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass Spectrometry Detection. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 89 of 141

Project Number: 091116/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences 

Industrial Ltda. 91 p. 

47832148 Grotenhuis, A.; Wendelburg, B. (2010) Radiovalidation of Analytical Methods for the 

Determination of the Residues of XDE-208 (Sulfoxaflor) in Agricultural Commodities 

and Animal Tissues. Project Number: 101569, 101569/OCR. Unpublished study prepared 

by Dow Agrosciences, LLC. 91 p. 

47832259 Wendelburg, B. (2010) Method Validation Study for the Determination of Residues of XDE208 and its Major Metabolites in Bovine and Poultry Tissues using Offline Solid-Phase 

Extraction and Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass Spectrometry Detection. Project 

Number: 091188/OCR, 091188. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 

76 p. 

47832260 Rawle, N. (2010) Laboratory Validation of a Method for the Determination of XDE-208, 

X11719474 and X11721061 in Bovine Milk, Skim Milk, Cream, Muscle, Liver Kidney 

and Fat: Final Report. Project Number: /091149, CEMS/4567. Unpublished study prepared 

by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 264 p. 

47832261 Clements, B. (2010) Laboratory Validation of a Method for the Determination of XDE-208, 

X11719474 and X11721061 in Hen Eggs, Muscle, Liver and Fat: Final Report. Project 

Number: CEMR/4568, CEMS/4568. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 164 p.

47832262 Merdian, H. (2010) XDE-208: Assessment, Development and Validation of Analytical 

Methods for the Determination of XDE-208 in Plant Materials, Foodstuffs of Animal Origin, 

Soil and Water. Project Number: 101095, P/1901/G. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL 

Europe Gmbh. 109 p. 

47832271 Seal, S. (2010) Independent Laboratory Validation Study for the Determination of Residues 

of Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208) and its Major Metabolites in Bovine and Poultry Tissues Using 

Offline Solid-Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass 

Spectrometric Detection. Project Number: 101098. Unpublished study prepared by Pyxant 

Labs, Inc. 155 

p. 

47832272 Seal, S. (2010) Independent Laboratory Validation of Enforcement Method for the 

Determination of Sulfoxaflor (XDE208) and its Main Metabolites in Agricultural 

Commodities using Offline Solid-Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography with 

Tandem Mass Spectrometric Detection. Project Number: 101097, 2136. Unpublished study 

prepared by Pyxant Labs, Inc. 107 p. 

47832273 Rawle, N. (2010) Laboratory Validation of a Method for the Determination of XDE-208, 

X11719474 and X11721061 in Dry Crops, Acidic Crops, Oily Crops and Crops with a High 

Water Content: Final Report. Project Number: 091174, CEMS/4295. Unpublished study 

prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 164 p. 

860.1360 Multiresidue method

47832263 Rockwell, D. (2010) PAM I Multiresidue Protocol Testing for XDE-208 in Oranges and 

Soybean Seed. Project Number: 101094, 2121. Unpublished study prepared by Pyxant Labs, 

Inc. 75 p. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 90 of 141

860.1380 Storage stability data

47832224 Rodrigues, A. (2010) Frozen Storage Stability of Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208) and its Main 

Metabolites in Crops: Interim Report. Project Number: 090091. Unpublished study 

prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 103 p. 

48641601 Rodrigues, A. (2011) Frozen Storage Stability of Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208) and its Main 

Metabolites in Crops: Interim Report. Project Number: 090091/OCR. Unpublished 

study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 122p. 

48288943 Rodrigues, A. (2010) Frozen Storage Stability of Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208) and its Main

Metabolites in Crops: Final Report. Project Number: 090091, 090091S1R1/OCR. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 111 p. 

860.1480 Meat/milk/poultry/eggs

47832295 Rawle, N. (2010) XDE-208 Livestock Feeding Study: Magnitude of Residue in Eggs, 

Muscle, Liver and Fat of Laying Hens. Project Number: 090116, CEMS/4561. Unpublished 

study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 492 p. 

47832296 Rawle, N. (2010) XDE-208 Livestock Feeding Study: Magnitude of Residue in Milk, 

Muscle, Fat, Liver and Kidney of Lactating Dairy Cattle. Project Number: 090117, 

CEMS/4554. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 667 p. 

860.1500 Crop field trials

47832081 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in, on Potato from the USA and Canada. Project 

Number: 080010, ARA/08/15/03. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates. 

211 p. 

47832082 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in/on Cotton from the USA. Project Number: 080027, 

ARA/08/15/01. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Agrosciences, LLC and Ag Research 

Associates. 324 p. 

47832093 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Almonds from the USA. Project 

Number: 080021, ARA/08/15/16. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 315 p. 

47832152 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Zucchinis following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 080078, DOW/GLP/08/15/5/1a, 

DOW/GLP/08/15/5/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. and 

Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd. 107 p. 

47832153 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Citrus following Foliar Application of GF-2032 in 

Australia. Project Number: 080079/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/6/1a, DOW/GLP/08/15/6. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, 

Ltd. 121 p.

47832154 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in-on Peach from the USA: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 080019, ARA/08/15/15/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 222 p. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 91 of 141

47832155 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in-on Apple from the USA: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 080020/OCR, ARA/08/15/14. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 227 p. 

47832156 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Sugar Beet from the USA. Project 

Number: 080011/OCR, ARA/08/15/06. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 276 p. 

47832157 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Leaf Lettuce from the USA. Project 

Number: 080012, ARA/08/15/08, 080012/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 226 p. 

47832158 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Spinach from the USA: Amended 

Report. Project Number: 080013/OCR, ARA/08/15/09. Unpublished study prepared by 

Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. and Ag Research Associates. 219 p. 

47832159 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Tomato from the USA. Project Number: 

080014/OCR, ARA/08/15/10. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and 

Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 223 p. 

47832160 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Cucumber from the USA. Project 

Number: 080015, ARA/08/15/11, ARA/08/15/11/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by 

Ag Research Associates. 213 p. 

47832161 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Squash from the USA. Project Number: 

080016/OCR, ARA/08/15/12. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and 

Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 212 p. 

47832162 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Broccoli from the USA. Project Number: 

080017/OCR, ARA/08/15/02. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences 

Industrial, Ltda. and Ag Research Associates. 208 p.

47832163 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Sugarbeet at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080030/02/OCR, CEMR/3936. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, 

Ltd. 334 p. 

47832164 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Carrots at Intervals and Harvest following Multiple 

Applications of FG-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080029/OCR, CEMS/3977. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

261 p. 

47832165 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Potatoes at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080028/OCR, CEMS/3933. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

264 p. 

47832166 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in-on Strawberry from the USA: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 080026/OCR, ARA/09/15/01. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 233 p. 

47832167 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Grapes following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090108, DOW/GLP/09/14/1, DOW/GLP/09/14/OCR. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Services Pty. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 92 of 141

Ltd. 133 p. 

47832168 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Canola from the USA and Canada. Project 

Number: 080024/OCR, ARA/08/15/19. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 243 p. 

47832169 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Orange from the USA. Project Number: 

080018/OCR, ARA/08/15/13. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences 

Industrial, Ltda. and Ag Research Associates. 273 p. 

47832170 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Wheat from the USA and Canada: 

Amended Report. Project Number: 080022/OCR, ARA/08/15/04. Unpublished study 

prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. and Ag Research Associates. 467 p. 

47832171 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in-on Soybeans from the USA: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 080023/OCR, ARA/08/15/18. Unpublished study prepared by Dow 

AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. and Ag Research Associates. 427 p. 

47832173 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Leaf Lettuce at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080032/04, CEMS/3939, CEMS/3939/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 207 p. 

47832174 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Head Lettuce at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF20332 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080032/02, CEMS/3942, CEMR/3942/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 204 p. 

47832175 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Broccoli at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008 and 2009. Project 

Number: 080033/02/OCR, CEMS/3945. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 262 p. 

47832176 Rawie, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cauliflower at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of Gf-2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008 AND 2009. Project 

Number: 080033/04, CEMR/3947, CEMS/3947/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 265 p.

47832177 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Head Cabbage at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Application of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080034/02/OCR, CEMS/3949. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, 

Ltd. 228 p. 

47832178 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cherry Tomatoes at Intervals and Harvest 

following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project 

Number: 080036/02, CEMS/3957. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, 

Ltd. 204 p. 

47832179 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Tomatoes and Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of FG2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project 

Number: 80037/02/OCR, CEMS/3953. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 282 p. 

47832180 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Bell Peppers at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 93 of 141

080039/02/OCR, CEMS/3959. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, 

Ltd. 231 p. 

47832181 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cucumbers at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008 and 2009. 

Project Number: 080041/02, CEMS/3962, CEMR/3962/OCR. Unpublished study 

prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 287 p.

47832182 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Apples at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080045/02/OCR, CEMS/3968. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, 

Ltd. 208 p. 

47832183 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Pears at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project 

Number: 80046/02/OCR, CEMS/3971. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 219 p. 

47832184 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Peaches at Inervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008 and 2009. Project 

Number: 080047/02/OCR, CEMS/4069. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 248 p. 

47832185 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cherries at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008 and 2009. Project 

Number: 080048/02/OCR, CEMR/4072. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 244 p. 

47832186 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Grapes at Intervals and Harvest following 

Multiple Application of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080053, CEMS/3972, CEMS/3972/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 281 p. 

47832187 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cotton at Harvest Following Multiple 

Applications of GF-2032 - Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080055/02, 

CEMS/3931, CEMR/3931/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 248 p. 

47832188 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Lettuce following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 080073, DOW/GLP/08/15/1/1, 

DOW/GLP/08/15/1/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 

and Agrisearch Services Pty., Ltd. 116 p. 

47832189 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Broccoli, Cabbage, Chinese Cabbage and 

Brussels Sprouts following Foliar Application of GF-2032 in Australia. Project Number: 

080074, DOW/GLP/08/15/2/1, DOW/GLP/08/15/2/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by 

Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 190 p.

47832190 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Tomatoes following Foliar Application of 

GF-2032 in Australia. Project Number: 080076, DOW/GLP//08/15/3. Unpublished study 

prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 136 p. 

47832191 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Apples following Foliar Application of GF-2032 

in Australia and New Zealand. Project Number: 080080, DOW/GLP/08/15/7/1, 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 94 of 141

DOW/GLP/08/15/7/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and 

Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 160 p. 

47832192 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Pears following Foliar Application of GF-2032 

in Australia. Project Number: 080081, DOW/GLP/08/15/8/1, DOW/GLP/08/15/8/OCR. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical 

Pty Ltd. 123 p. 

47832193 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Nectarines following Foliar Application of 

GF-2032 in Australia and New Zealand. Project Number: 080082, 

DOW/GLP/08/15/10/1, DOW/GLP/08/15/10/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by 

Agrisearch Services Pty., Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 139 p. 

47832194 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Peaches following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia and New Zealand. Project Number: 080083/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/11/1. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, 

Ltd. 138 p. 

47832195 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cherries following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia and New Zealand. Project Number: 080084/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/12/1. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, 

Ltd. 121 p. 

47832196 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Apricots following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia and New Zealand. Project Number: 080085/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/13/1. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, 

Ltd. 124 p. 

47832197 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Grapes following Foliar Application of GF-2032 

in Australia and New Zealand. Project Number: 080088/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/9/1. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, 

Ltd. 148 p. 

47832198 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Strawberries following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia and New Zealand. Project Number: 080089/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/16/1. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, 

Ltd. 131 p. 

47832199 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Canola following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 08008B/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/19/1. Unpublished 

study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 133 p. 

47832201 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cotton Following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 080090/ANZ/2008, DOW/GLP/08/15/20/1. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, 

Ltd. 142 p. 

47832202 Rampazzo, P. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 Insecticide in Citrus after Multiple Applications 

of GF-2032 Formulation, Brazil, 2008. Project Number: 080093, GHB/P/1839. Unpublished 

study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 431 p. 

47832203 Rampazzo, P. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 Insecticide in Cotton after Multiple 

Applications of GF-2032 Formulation, Brazil, 2008-2009. Project Number: 080095, 

GHB/P/1842. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 316 p. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 95 of 141

47832219 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Beans at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008 and 2009. Project 

Number: 080113/02, CEMS/3975, CEMR/3975. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 340 p. 

47832220 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in/on Carrot from the USA. Project Number: 080122, 

ARA/08/15/05, GHB/P/1836. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and 

Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 281 p. 

47832221 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in/on Bulb Onion in the USA. Project Number: 

080123, ARA/08/15/07, GHB/P/1840. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 211 p. 

47832222 Rampazzp, P. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 Insecticide in Melon after Applications of GF2032 Formulation, Brazil, 2008. Project Number: 080148, GHB/P/1848, 10001643. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 255 p. 

47832223 Rampazzo, P. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 Insecticide in Soybeans Commodities After 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Formulation, Brazil, 2008-2009. Project Number: 080149, 

GHB/P/1846, 10001643. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 

363 p. 

47832228 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cereals Following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090114, DOW/GLP/09/15/1, 10/0030. Unpublished 

study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 223 p. 

47832229 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cereals Following Foliar Application of GF2032 in New Zealand. Project Number: 080087, DOW/GLP/08/15/18/1. Unpublished 

study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 258 p. 

47832230 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cereals Following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 080086, DOW/GLP/08/15/17/1. Unpublished study 

prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 253 p.

47832231 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Barley at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2009. Project Number: 

090031, CEMS/4365, CEMR/4365. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 434 p.

47832232 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Barley at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080050/02, CEMS/3923, CEMR/3923. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 472 p. 

47832233 Rampazzo, P. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 Insecticide in Dry Beans After Applications of 

GF-2032 Formulation, Brazil, 2008. Project Number: 080150, GHB/P/1849. Unpublished 

study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 282 p. 

47832234 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in and on Cabbage from the USA. Project 

Number: 090022, ARA/09/15/08, GHB/P/1874. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 221 p. 

47832235 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Canola following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090109, DOW/GLP/09/16/1, 10/0031. Unpublished 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 96 of 141

study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 139 p. 

47832236 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Oil Seed Rape at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2008 and 2009. Project 

Number: 080052/02, CEMS/3928, CEMR/3928. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 234 p. 

47832237 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cauliflowers following Foliar Application 

of GF-2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090104, DOW/GLP/09/10/1, 09/0901. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical 

Pty, Ltd. 108 p. 

47832238 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Green Onion from the USA. Project 

Number: 090018, ARA/09/15/04, GHB/P/1871. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 205 p. 

47832239 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Celery from the USA. Project Number: 

090019, ARA/09/15/18, GHB/P/1872. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 213 p.

47832240 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Muskmelon from the USA. Project 

Number: 090021, ARA/09/15/12, GHB/P/1873. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 205 p. 

47832241 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Pear from the USA. Project Number: 090026, 

RA/09/15/14, GHB/P/1869. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and 

Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 204 p. 

47832242 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Plum from the USA. Project Number: 090028, 

ARA/09/15/05, GHB/P/1866. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and 

Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 223 p. 

47832243 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Pecan from the USA: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 090029, ARA/09/15/13, GHB/P/1868. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 200 p. 

47832244 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cotton at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Southern Europe - 2009. Project Number: 090032, 

CEMS/4364, CEMR/4364. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

311 p. 

47832245 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Citrus following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090035, DOW/GLP/09/11/1, 10/0033. Unpublished 

study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 133 p. 

47832246 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Head Lettuce from the USA. Project 

Number: 090045, ARA/09/15/03, GHB/P/1862. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 194 p. 

47832247 Becker, J. (2010) Magnitude of Residues of XDE-208 in/on Wheat from the USA and 

Canada - Formulation Bridging Study: Amended Report. Project Number: 090076, 

ARA/09/15/16, GHB/P/1870. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates 

and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 431 p. 

47832248 Rampazzo, P. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 Insecticide in Wheat After Applications of 

GF-2032 Formulation, Brazil, 2008. Project Number: 080152, GHB/P/1847, 10001643. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 97 of 141

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 380 p. 

47832249 Becker, J. (2010) Magnitude of Residues of XDE-208 in/on Soybean from the USA -

Formulation Bridging Study. Project Number: 090079, ARA/09/15/17, GHB/P/1875. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial 

Ltda. 347 p.

47832250 Rampazzo, P. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 Insecticide in Tomato after Applications of 

GF-2032 Formulation, Brazil, 2009. Project Number: 090095, GHB/P/1850, 10001643. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 228 p.

47832251 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Lettuce following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090101, DOW/GLP/09/07/1, 09/0900. Unpublished 

study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 122 p. 

47832252 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Spinach following Foliar Application of GF-2032 

in Australia. Project Number: 090102/ANZ/2009/OCR, DOW/GLP/09/08/1, 

090102/ANZ/2009. Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. and 

Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 111 p. 

47832253 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Capsicums following Foliar Application of 

GF-2032 in Australia. Project Number: 080077/ANZ/2008/OCR, DOW/GLP/08/15/4/1, 

080077/ANZ/2008. Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. and 

Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. 108 p. 

47832254 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Peaches following Foliar Application of GF-2032 

in Australia. Project Number: 090106/ANZ/2009/OCR, DOW/GLP/09/12/1, 

090106/ANZ/2009. Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. and 

Agrisearch Services Pty, Ltd. 124 p. 

47832290 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in and on Grape from the USA. Project 

Number: 080025, ARA/08/15/20. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 251 p. 

47832291 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Nectarines and Plums following Foliar 

Application of GF-2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090107, DOW/GLP/09/13/1. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Analytical Pty, Ltd. 105 p.

47832292 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Outdoor Melons at Intervals and Harvest 

Following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080041/02, CEMS/3965. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

280 p.

47832293 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Wheat at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 

080049/02, CEMS/3921. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

611 p. 

47832294 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Wheat at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2009. Project Number: 

090030, CEMS/4363. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 551 p. 

48288901 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues in/on a Root, Leafy Vegetable, Cereal, and Forage Grass as 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 98 of 141

Rotated Crops Following Treatment with XDE-208. Project Number: 090056, 

ARA/09/15/06, ARA/09/15/06/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates. 375 p. 

48288902 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Apple from the USA. Project 

Number: 090132, ARA/09/15/26, ARA/09/15/26/OCR. Unpublished study 

prepared by Ag Research Associates. 138 p. 

48288903 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Barley at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 101647, 

CEMR/4741, 101647/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

231 p. 

48288904 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Barley from the USA. Project

Number: 090131, ARA/09/15/25, 090131/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by 

Ag Research Associates. 168 p. 

48288905 Rawle, N.; Jutsum, L. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Beans at Intervals and Harvest 

Following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. 

Project Number: 101471, CEMR/4710/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 266 p. 

48288907 Rawle, N.; Jutsum, L. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Broccoli at Intervals and Harvest 

Following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project 

Number: 101455, CEMR/4692/OCR, CEMR/4692/VERSION/2. Unpublished study prepared 

by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 183 p. 

48288908 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Oil Seed Rape at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 101630, 

CEMR/4713, CEMS/4713/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, 

Ltd. 234 p. 

48288909 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cauliflower at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project 

Number: 101456, CEMR/4693, CEMS/4693/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 204 p. 

48288910 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in and on Cherry from the USA. Project 

Number: 090027, ARA/09/15/15, ARA/09/15/15/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial, Ltda. 204 p. 

48288911 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cotton at Intervals and Harvest Following Multiple 

Applications of GF-2032 Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 101774, CEMR/4742, 

CEMS/4742/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 215 p.

48288912 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cucumbers at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 

101465, CEMR/4704, CEMS/4704/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 230 p. 

48288913 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Grapes at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of FG-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 

101454, CEMR/4715/VERSION/2, CEMS/4715/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 230 p. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 99 of 141

48288914 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in, on Grapefruit from the USA. Project 

Number: 090024, ARA/09/15/19, ARA/09/15/19/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by 

Ag Research Associates. 347 p. 

48288915 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Lemon from the USA. Project Number: 

090025/OCR, ARA/09/15/20. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates 

and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 208 p. 

48288916 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Head Lettuce at Interval and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 

101625, CEMR/4691, CEMS/4691/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 182 p. 

48288917 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Leaf Lettuce at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 

101453, CEMR/4690, CEMS/4690/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 181 p. 

48288918 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Outdoor Melons at Intervals and Harvest 

Following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 

101468, CEMR/4707, CEMS/4707/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 252 p. 

48288919 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Mustard Greens from the USA. Project 

Number: 090129, ARA/09/15/23, 090129/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 138 p. 

48288920 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Orange from the USA. Project Number: 

090127, ARA/09/15/21, 090127/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 200 p. 

48288921 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Pears at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 

101474, CEMR/4714, CEMS/4714/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 175 p. 

48288922 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Pepper from the USA. Project Number: 

090130, ARA/09/15/24, 090130/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 270 p. 

48288923 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Bell Peppers at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 101628, 

CEMR/4701, CEMS/4701/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, 

Ltd. 183 p.

48288924 Litzow, D. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Chilis Following Foliar Application of GF2032 in Australia. Project Number: 090103, DOW/GLP/09/09/1, DOW/GLP/09/09/OCR. 

Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty. Ltd., and Agrisearch Analytical 

Pty, Ltd. 118 p. 

48288925 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Potato from the USA. Project Number: 

101089, ARA/10/15/02, 101089/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 177 p. 

48288926 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Radish from the USA. Project 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 100 of 141

Number: 090016, ARA/10/15/01, 090016/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag 

Research Associates and Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 154 p. 

48288927 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Tomatoes at Intervals and Harvest Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project Number: 

101460, CEMR/4695, CEMS/4695/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 225 p. 

48288928 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cherry Tomatoes at Intervals and Harvest 

Following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Northern and Southern Europe - 2010. Project 

Number: 101626, CEMR/4697, CEMS/4697/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM 

Analytical Services, Ltd. 191 p. 

48288929 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Indoor Tomatoes at Intervals and Harvest 

Following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - Europe - 2010. Project Number: 101627, 

CEMR/4699, CEMS/4699/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical 

Services, Ltd. 227 p. 

48288930 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in/on Tomato from the USA. Project Number: 

090128, ARA/09/15/22, 090128/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 188 p.

48581201 Litzow, D. (2011) Residues of XDE-208 in Canola following Foliar Application of GF-2032

 In Australia. Project Number: 101784, DOWAUS/GLP/10/03, DOWAUS/GLP/10/03/1.

 Unpublished study prepared by Agrisearch Services Pty., Ltd. and Agrisearch Analytical Pty,

 Ltd. 133p. 

860.1520 Processed food/feed 

47832172 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Sugarbeet and Process Fractions following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080030/03/OCR, 

CEMS/3937. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 372 p. 

47832204 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Potatoes and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080096, 

CEMS/3934, CEMR/3934. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

355 p. 

47832205 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in Carrot Processed Fractions: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 080097, ARA/08/15/21. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and University of Idaho, Cooperative Extension and Dow AgroSciences Industrial 

Ltda. 212 p. 

47832206 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in Onion Processed Fractions. Project Number: 

080099, ARA/08/15/22. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and 

University of Idaho, Cooperative Extension and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 

191 p. 

47832207 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Leaf Lettuce and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080100/01, 

CEMS/3940, CEMR/3940. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

165 p. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 101 of 141

47832208 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Head Lettuce and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080100/02, 

CEMS/3943, CEMR/3943. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

181 p. 

47832209 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Head Cabbage and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - Northern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080101, 

CEMR/3950, CEMS/3950. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

253 p. 

47832210 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Tomatoes and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Southern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080102, 

CEMS/3954, CEMR/3954. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

289 p. 

47832211 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in Orange Processed Fractions: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 080103, ARA/08/15/23, GHB/P/1843. Unpublished study prepared by 

Ag Research Associates and University of Idaho, Cooperative Extension and Dow 

AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 228 p. 

47832212 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Apples and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080104, 

CEMR/3969, CEMS/3969. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

293 p. 

47832213 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cherries and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern Europe - 2009. Project Number: 080105, 

CEMR/4362, CEMS/4362. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

250 p.

47832214 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in Wheat Processed Fractions. Project Number: 

080106, ARA/08/15/24. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research Associates and GLP 

Technologies and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 216 p. 

47832215 Becker, J. (2010) Residue of XDE-208 in Soybean Processed Fractions: Amended Report. 

Project Number: 080108, ARA/08/15/25. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and GLP Technologies and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 212 p. 

47832216 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Grapes and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF-2032 Northern Europe - 2008. Project Number: 080110, 

CEMR/3973, CEMS/3973. Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 

246 p. 

47832217 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Strawberry Processed Fractions. Project Number: 

080111, ARA/09/15/02, GHB/P/1856. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and University of Idaho, Cooperative Extension and Dow AgroSciences 

Industrial Ltda. 200 p.

47832218 Becker, J. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Cotton Processed Fractions. Project Number: 

080112, ARA/08/15/26, GHB/P/1859. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates and GLP Technologies and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 207 p.

47832297 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Barley grain and Process Fractions at Harvest 

Following Multiple Applications of GF-2032 - 2008. Project Number: 080107, CEMS/3924. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 102 of 141

Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 367 p.

47832298 Rawle, N. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Oil Seed Rape and Process Fractions Following 

Multiple Applications of GF2032 - 2008. Project Number: 080109, CEMR/3929. 

Unpublished study prepared by CEM Analytical Services, Ltd. 253 p.

48288931 Schreier, T. (2010) Residues of XDE-208 in Wheat Processed Fractions. Project Number: 

090133, ARA/09/15/27, 090133/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Ag Research 

Associates, GLP Technologies and Dow AgroSciences Industrial Ltda. 258 p.

Hydrolysis Study – Household Processing

47832083 Ma, M.; Adelfinskaya, Y. (2010) Processing Study to Determine the Nature of Residues of 

(Carbon 14)-XDE-208, (Carbon 14)-X11719474 and (Carbon 14)-X11721061 Following 

Industrial or Household Preparation. Project Number: 080145. Unpublished study prepared 

by Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 81 p. 

860.1850 Crop Rotation Studies

47832311 Graper, L.; Smith, K.; Balcer, J. (2010) A Confined Rotational Crop Study with 14C-XDE208. Project Number: 070051. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC and 

Research for Hire and ABC Laboratories, Inc. 185 p. 

48445804 DeBoer, G.; Robinson, A.; Adelfinskaya, Y. (2011) Uptake, Translocation and Metabolism 

of Sulfoxaflor (XDE-208) in Three Plants: Cabbage, Pepper and Cotton. Project Number: 

RSB/001. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroScience Discovery Research. 32 p.

Non-Guideline Studies

47832304 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) XDE-208 MII Section 4 Residues . Project Number: MII/0004. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 1138 p. 

47832307 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) OECD XDE-208 Document N. Project Number: N/0001. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 76 p. 

47832310 The Inter-conversion of the Diastereomers of XDE-208 and X11719474 in Soil, Water,

 and Biological Solutions. Dow AgroSciences study ID 101081, 23 July 2010. GLP

 unpublished. Ma, M., 2010.

47832520 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) GF-2372 MIII Section I Identity. Project Number: MIII/0013. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences LLC. 27 p. 

47832523 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) GF-2372 MIII Section 4 Residues. Project Number: MIII/0016. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences LLC. 9 p. 

47832524 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) GF-2372 MIII Section 5 Fate. Project Number: MIII/0017. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences LLC. 11 p. 

48165607 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) GF-2032 MIII Section 1: Identity. Project Number: MIII/0007/OCR. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 28 p. 

48165608 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) GF-2032: MIII Section 2: Analytical Methods. Project Number: 

MIII/0008/OCR. Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 9 p. 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 103 of 141

48165610 Brinkmeyer, R. (2010) GF-2032 MIII Section 4: Residues. Project Number: MIII/0010. 

Unpublished study prepared by Dow AgroScience, LLC. 9 p. 

48288944 Johnston, J. (2010) Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for 

Proposed Uses of Sulfoxaflor (Amended Report). Project Number: Sulfoxaflor/10/02, 

000721/000/BOTO/1210 /0001, SULFOXAFLOR/10/02/A/OCR. Unpublished study 

prepared by Exponent, Inc. 39 p.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 104 of 141

Appendix 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor

 

Appendix 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor.

Commodity

(as proposed)

Proposed 

Tolerance 

(ppm)

HED-Recommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity 

definition)

Almond 0.02

See Table 1

See Nut, tree, group 14

Almond, hulls 4.0

Apple 0.3 See Fruit, pome, group 11

Apple, dried pomace 1.3 Tolerance for processed commodity 

is not required; the residues are 

covered by the RAC tolerance.

Barley, grain 0.15

Barley, hay 0.8

Barley, straw 1.5

Barley, malt sprouts 0.2 Tolerance for processed commodity 

is not required; the residues are 

covered by the RAC tolerance.

Beans, dry seed 0.25

Bean, succulent 0.7

Beet, sugar, root 0.03 See Root and tuber vegetables, group 

1

Beet, sugar, molasses 0.03

Beet, sugar, raw sugar 0.04 Tolerance for processed commodity 

is not required; the residues are 

covered by the RAC tolerance.

Beet, sugar, thick juice 0.15 Tolerance for processed commodity 

is not required; the residues are 

covered by the RAC tolerance.

Beet, sugar, dried pulp 0.07 Tolerance for processed commodity 

is not required; the residues are 

covered by the RAC tolerance.

Beet, sugar, tops 3.0 See Root and tuber vegetables, group 

2

Berry and small fruits, 

Berry subgroup 13-07F

1.5 See Small Fruit Vine Climbing Crop 

subgroup 13-07F

Berry and small fruits, 

subgroup 13-07G

0.6 See Berry, low growing, subgroup 

13-07G

Brassica Leafy Vegetables, 

head and stem (except 

cauliflower), subgroup 5A

1.0 See Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 

5, except cauliflower

Brassica Leafy Vegetables, 

leafy greens, subgroup 5B

1.6 See Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 

5, except cauliflower

Berry, low growing, 

subgroup 13-07G

Broccoli 0.45 See Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 

5, except cauliflower

Bulb vegetables, Onion, 

bulb, subgroup 3-07A

0.01

Bulb Vegetables, Onion, 

green, subgroup 3-07B

0.6

Cabbage 1.0 See Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 105 of 141

Appendix 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor.

Commodity

(as proposed)

Proposed 

Tolerance 

(ppm)

HED-Recommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity 

definition)

See Table 1.

5

Canola, seed 0.25 See Rapeseed subgroup 20A

Canola, meal 0.5 Rapeseed, meal is correct term.

Carrot, roots 0.05 See Vegetables, root and tuber, group 

1

Carrot, tops 4.0 See Leaves of Root and Tuber 

Vegetables, Crop Group 2

Cauliflower 0.08 Individual tolerance is required as it 

exceeds a 5x factor relative to other 

crop group representative 

commodities.

Celery 1.0 See Leaf petiole (except Brassica), 

subgroup 4B

Cherry 2.5 See Fruit, stone,

Crop group 12

Cherry, dried cherry 15.0

Citrus, dried pulp 0.9

Citrus, juice --

Citrus, oil --

Citrus, peel 1.0

Cottonseed subgroup, 20C 0.2

Cotton, seed 0.2 See Cottonseed subgroup 20C

Cotton, hulls 0.4

Cotton, gin byproducts 8.0

Cotton, aspirated grain 

fractions

4.6 AGF tolerance not required for 

cotton.

Cucumber 0.3 See Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9

Cucurbit Vegetables (except 

squash), Group 9

0.3 Squash can be included in the crop 

group tolerance. See Vegetable, 

cucurbit, group 9

Fruit, citrus, 

group 10

0.6 Fruit, citrus, 

group 10-10

Fruit, Pome, 

group 11

0.40 Fruit, Pome, 

group 11-10

Fruiting Vegetables (except 

cucurbits, plus okra) , 

Group 8

1.2 See Vegetables, fruiting, group 8-10

Fruit, stone,

group 12

0.6 Fruit, stone,

group 12

Grain, aspirated fractions --

Grape 1.3 See Crop subgroup 13-07F

Grape, raisin 5.0

Grapefruit 0.25 See Fruit, citrus, group 10-10

Leaf petiole, subgroup 4A 5.0 Spinach requires a separate tolerance.

Leaf petiole, subgroup 4B 1.0

Leaves of Root and Tuber 

Vegetables, Crop Group 2

4.0 Vegetables, leaves of root and tuber 

vegetables, group 2 is correct term.

Lemon 0.45 See Fruit, citrus, group 10-10
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 106 of 141

Appendix 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor.

Commodity

(as proposed)

Proposed 

Tolerance 

(ppm)

HED-Recommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity 

definition)

Lettuce, head 2.5 See Table 1. See Leaf petiole, subgroup 4A

Lettuce, leaf 3.5 See Leaf petiole, subgroup 4A

Low growing berry 

subgroup 13-07G

0.60 See Berry, low growing, subgroup 

13-07G

Melon 0.3 See Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9

Mustard greens 1.6 See Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 

5, except cauliflower

Nectarine, pitted fruit 0.3 See Fruit, stone (except cherry), 

group 12

Nuts, tree, Crop Group 14 -- Nut, tree, group 14

Oilseed Group, rapeseed 

subgroup 20A

0.3

Oilseed Group, cottonseed 

subgroup 20C

0.15

Onion, dry bulb 0.01 Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A

Onion, green 0.6 Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B

Orange 0.6 See Fruit, citrus, group 10

Peach, pitted fruit 0.6 See Fruit, stone, group 12, except 

cherry

Pear 0.40 See Pome fruit,

group 11-10

Pecan 0.01 See Nuts, tree,

group 14

Pepper, bell and non-bell 1.2 See Vegetables, fruiting group 8-10

Pistachio 0.02 Pistachio requires a separate 

tolerance. It is not yet a member of 

crop group 14.

Plum, pitted fruit 0.25 See Fruit, stone, group 12, except 

cherry

Plum, prune, dried Not needed, covered by RAC 

tolerance.

Potato 0.01 See Vegetables, root and tuber, group 

1

Potato, wet peel 0.02 Tolerance for processed commodities 

are not required; the residues are 

covered by the RAC tolerance.

Potato, chips 0.02

Potato, dried 0.02

Potato, granules/ flakes 0.02

Radish, roots 0.03 See Vegetable, root and tuber, group 

1

Radish, tops 0.7 See Leaves of root and tuber 

vegetables, group 2

Rapeseed subgroup 20-A 0.25

Root Vegetables, subgroup 

1A

0.05 See Vegetable, root and tuber, group 

1

Root Vegetables (except 

sugar beet), crop subgroup 

1B

0.05 See Vegetable, root and tuber, group 

1

Small Fruit Vine Climbing 1.3 Fruit, small, vine climbing, subgroup 
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 107 of 141

Appendix 1. Tolerance Summary for Sulfoxaflor.

Commodity

(as proposed)

Proposed 

Tolerance 

(ppm)

HED-Recommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments (correct commodity 

definition)

subgroup (except fuzzy 

kiwifruit), subgroup 13-07F

See Table 1.

13-07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit

Soybean, seed 0.2

Soybean, hay 1.8 Covered by Crop group 7

Soybean, forage 1.9

Soybean, hulls 0.3 Tolerance for processed commodities 

are not required; the residues are 

covered by the RAC tolerance.

Soybean, meal, toasted 0.3

Soybean, aspirated grain 

fractions

18.0 See Grain, aspirated fractions

Spinach 5.0

Squash 0.03 See Vegetable, cucurbit ,

group 9

Strawberry, fruit 0.6 See Crop subgroup 13-07G

Tomato 0.45

Tomato, puree 0.7

Tomato, paste 1.6

Tomato, catsup 0.8 HED does not set tolerances for 

ketchup (calculated as 1.3 ppm).

Tree Nuts (plus pistachio),

crop group 14

0.02 A separate tolerance is required for 

pistachio. See Nut, tree, group 14

Tuberous and Corm 

Vegetables, subgroup 1C

0.01 See Vegetable, root and tuber, group 

1

Tuberous and Corm 

Vegetables, subgroup 1D

0.01 See Vegetable, root and tuber, group 

1

Vegetable, brassica, leafy 

(except cauliflower),

Crop Group 5

-- Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5, 

except cauliflower

Vegetables, Cucurbit, Crop 

Group 9

-- Vegetables, cucurbit, group 9

Vegetables, fruiting, Croup 

Group 8-10

-- Vegetables, fruiting, group 8-10, 

except cucurbits

Vegetable, root and tuber, 

Group 1

-- Vegetable, root and tuber,

group 1

Watercress -- Translate subgroup 4A data.

Wheat, grain 0.07

Wheat, forage 0.8

Wheat hay 1.1

Wheat, straw 2.0

Livestock Commodities

Tolerances of unchanged parent, sulfoxaflor were also proposed for milk at 0.08 ppm; fat of cattle, goat, horse and 

sheep at 0.04 ppm; kidney of cattle, goat, horse and sheep at 0.2 ppm; meat of cattle, goat, horse and sheep at 0.1 

ppm; meat byproducts of cattle, goat, horse and sheep at 0.25 ppm; fat and meat of hog at 0.01 ppm; meat 

byproducts of hog at 0.04 ppm; egg at 0.01 ppm; fat and meat of poultry at 0.01 ppm; meat byproduct of poultry at 

0.03 ppm.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 108 of 141

Appendix 2. Field Trial Geographic Distribution.

Crop Country # of Trials

Human Foods

Carrot Root EU, USA 12

Sugar Beet Root EU, USA 13

Potato Tuber EU, USA/CAN 18

Radish Root USA 6

Onion USA 12

Celery USA 6

Lettuce (Head and Leaf) AUS, EU, USA 32

Spinach and Swiss Chard AUS, USA 8

Broccoli AUS, EU, USA 15

Cabbage AUS, EU, USA 14

Cauliflower AUS, EU 10

Mustard Green USA 8

Green Bean BRZ, EU 6

Shelled Dry Bean BRZ, EU 6

Soybean Seed AUS, USA 19

Pepper (Bell and Non-bell) BRZ, EU, USA 20

Tomato AUS, BRZ, EU, USA 44

Cucumber EU, USA 18

Melon BRZ, EU, USA 16

Squash (Summer and Winter) and Zucchini AUS, USA 8

Grapefruit USA 8

Lemon USA 6

Orange AUS, BRZ, USA 26

Apple AUS/NZ, EU, USA 22

Pear AUS, EU, USA 14

Cherry AUS/NZ, EU, USA 14

Nectarine AUS/NZ 5

Peach and Apricot AUS/NZ, EU, USA 22

Plum AUS, USA 7

Grape AUS/NZ, EU, USA 33

Strawberry AUS/NZ, USA 13

Almond Nutmeat USA 6

Pecan USA 6

Canola (Rape Seed) AUS, EU, USA/CAN 21

Cotton Seed AUS, BRZ, EU, USA 22

Barley Grain AUS, EU, USA 25

Wheat Grain AUS/NZ, BRZ, EU, USA/CAN 36

Total 583

Livestock Feeds

Almond Hull USA 6

Cotton Gin Byproduct AUS, BRZ, EU, USA 21

Carrot Top USA 4

Radish Top USA 6

Sugar Beet Top EU, USA 13

Barley (Straw & Hay) AUS, EU, USA 27

Soybean (Forage & Hay) BRZ, USA 22

Wheat (Forage, Hay & Straw) AUS/NZ, BRZ, EU, USA/CAN 35
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 109 of 141

Appendix 3. Summary Table of NAFTA and European Field Trial Data

Table A3. Summary of Residues from the Crop Field Trials with Sulfoxaflor

(SC formulation unless otherwise specified).

Crop Matrix Applic. Rate

lb ai/A

(g a.i./ha)

PHI 

(days)

n Residues (ppm)

Min Max HAFT1 Median Mean Std. Dev

Crop Group 1 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Carrot roots 0.357-0.376

(401-423) 7 24 <0.01 0.032 0.031 0.010 0.015 0.008

Potato roots 0.355-0.374 

(399-420) 6-8 36 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

Radish roots

(WDG

formulation)

0.360-0.363

(404-407) 7 12 <0.01 0.013 0.012 0.010 0.011 0.001

0.360-0.364

(404-407) 7 6 <0.01 0.016 0.014 0.010 0.011 0.002

Sugar beet roots 0.351-0.374 

(394-420) 7 26 <0.01 0.025 0.023 0.010 0.011 0.003

Crop Group 2 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Carrot tops 0.360-0.366

(405-411) 7 8 0.311 2.283 2.069 0.515 0.857 0.764

Radish tops

(WDG

formulation)

0.360-0.364

(404-407) 7 12 0.183 0.506 0.478 0.258 0.297 0.108

0.360-0.364

(404-407) 7 6 0.242 0.465 0.441 0.398 0.370 0.099

Sugar beet tops 0.351-0.374 

(394-420) 7 25 0.141 1.685 1.615 0.716 0.744 0.452

Crop Group 3 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Dry Bulb Onion 0.357-0.365

(400-409) 7 12 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 NA

Green Onion 0.360-0.366 

(404-410) 7-8 12 <0.01 0.440 0.387 0.105 0.132 0.130

Crop Group 4 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 3-day PHI)

Celery 0.360-0.361 

(404-405) 2-3 24 0.058 0.804 0.771 0.143 0.229 0.235

Head Lettuce 0.328-0.388

(369-436) 2-3 27 <0.01 0.528 0.494 0.040 0.148 0.177

Leaf Lettuce

(WDG

formulation)

0.342-0.377

(384-424) 2-3 36 0.05 3.07 2.74 0.495 0.744 0.659

0.360-0.363

(404-407) 3 6 0.379 0.885 0.806 0.577 0.595 0.189

Spinach 0.343-0.372

(385-418) 3 16 0.039 3.256 2.863 0.820 1.076 0.927

Crop Group 5 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 3-day PHI)

Broccoli 0.347-0.379 

(390-426) 3 29 <0.01 1.600 1.584 0.070 0.201 0.395

Cauliflower 0.320-0.373 

(360-419) 3-4 20 <0.01 0.07 0.055 0.014 0.020 0.014

Cabbage 0.341-0.383 

(383-430) 2-3 28 <0.01 0.400 0.377 0.058 0.092 0.103

Mustard Greens 0.354-0.367

(397-411) 2-4 16 0.278 1.167 0.899 0.666 0.680 0.234
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 110 of 141

Table A3. Summary of Residues from the Crop Field Trials with Sulfoxaflor

(SC formulation unless otherwise specified).

Crop Matrix Applic. Rate

lb ai/A

(g a.i./ha)

PHI 

(days)

n Residues (ppm)

Min Max HAFT1 Median Mean Std. Dev

Crop Group 6 Beans (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Succulent edible 

podded bean

0.352-0.372

(393-411) 7 12 0.024 2.019 1.938 0.104 0.422 0.716

Dry shelled bean 0.350-0.365

(393-411) 7 12 0.020 0.112 0.104 0.078 0.068 0.029

Crop Group 7 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

(Use the higher of the two for group 7)

Soybean, Forage 0.178-0.183 

(200-205) 7-8 38 0.013 1.734 1.690 0.219 0.346 0.386

Soybean, Hay 0.358-0.368

(401-414) 6-8 38 0.057 1.378 1.238 0.725 0.670 0.383

Crop Group 8 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 1-day PHI)

Tomato 0.317-0.383

(356-430) 1 88 <0.01 0.762 0.602 0.051 0.091 0.123

Pepper, bell 0.321 - 0.364 

(361-409) 1 24 <0.01 0.284 0.256 0.092 0.106 0.095

Pepper, non-bell 0.343 - 0.428 

(385-481) 1 15 0.017 0.46 0.44 0.090 0.156 0.145

Crop Group 9 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 1-day PHI)

Cucumber (revised 

from Tier II removing 

Zucchini samples)

0.355-0.374

(399-420) 1 36 <0.01 0.172 0.152 0.047 0.055 0.049

Squash, summer

/Zucchini (revised 

from Tier II adding 

Zucchini samples)

Squash, winter

0.357-0.367

(400-412) 1 10 <0.01 0.10 0.10 0.010 0.031 0.039

0.357-0.364

(400-408) 1 6 <0.01 0.021 0.018 0.011 0.013 0.004

Melon 0.356-0.375

(400-421) 0-2e 31 <0.01 0.304 0.266 0.031 0.054 0.067

Crop Group 10 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 1-day PHI)

Grapefruit 0.360 (404) 1 16 <0.01 0.186 0.130 0.014 0.041 0.056

Lemons 0.360

(404) 1 12 0.025 0.317 0.136 0.050 0.098 0.100

Oranges 0.263-0.368 

(296-413) 1 61 0.037 0.46 0.44 0.114 0.167 0.120

CROP Group 11 Pome Fruit (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Apples 0.289-0.374

(325-420) 6-8 56 <0.01 0.297 0.266 0.070 0.086 0.057

Pears 0.279-0.379f

(314-426) 7-8 32 0.044 0.267 0.261 0.142 0.146 0.063

Crop Group 12 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Apricot 0.337-0.345 

(379-388) 7 8 0.13 0.45 0.39 0.16 0.21 0.12

Cherry 0.337-0.365

(379-410) 7 32 0.26 1.60 1.49 0.820 0.824 0.379

Nectarine 0.341-0.351 7 18 0.074 0.247 0.232 0.150 0.154 0.045
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 111 of 141

Table A3. Summary of Residues from the Crop Field Trials with Sulfoxaflor

(SC formulation unless otherwise specified).

Crop Matrix Applic. Rate

lb ai/A

(g a.i./ha)

PHI 

(days)

n Residues (ppm)

Min Max HAFT1 Median Mean Std. Dev

(383-394)

Peach 0.338-0.373 

(380-419) 6-8 48 <0.01 0.636 0.541 0.121 0.164 0.118

Plum

(WDG

formulation)

0.342-0.370

(384-415) 7 14 0.021 0.221 0.212 0.049 0.074 0.064

0.358-0.366 

(401-410) 7 12 0.014 0.362 0.358 0.076 0.115 0.117

Crop Group 15 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Barley Grain 0.083-0.095

(94-108) 12-17 50 <0.010 0.37 0.32 0.048 0.060 0.060

Barley Hay 0.086-0.096

(97-108) 6-8f 40 <0.010 0.643 0.642 0.213 0.249 0.174

Barley Straw 0.083-0.095

(94-108) 12-17 52 <0.010 2.2 1.46 0.189 0.322 0.413

Wheat Grain

(WDG

formulation)

0.084-0.098

(94-110) 12-17 67 <0.01 0.067 0.059 0.013 0.019 0.013

0.089-0.093

(100-104) 14 6 <0.01 0.063 0.063 0.010 0.028 0.027

Wheat Forage

(WDG

formulation)

0.084-0.098

(94-110) 6-8g 60 <0.01 1.400 1.400 0.108 0.187 0.225

0.084-0.098

(94-110) 7 6 0.041 0.221 0.197 0.095 0.111 0.073

Wheat Hay

(WDG

formulation)

0.084-0.096

(94-108) 6-8 60 0.024 1.024 0.848 0.246 0.292 0.202

0.089-0.093

(100-104) 7 6 0.101 0.167 0.159 0.150 0.139 0.030

Wheat Straw

(WDG

formulation)

0.084-0.097

(94-109) 12-17g 69 0.030 1.562 1.489 0.250 0.400 0.393

0.088-0.093

(99-104) 14 6 0.060 1.641 1.600 0.105 0.588 0.784

Crop Groups 13-07F & 13-07G (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 1-day or 7-day PHI)

13-07G

Strawberries

0.339-0.369

(381-414) 1 26 0.02 0.50 0.49 0.184 0.182 0.109

13-07F

Grape (all)

0.276-0.390

(310-438) 7-8 66 0.01 1.9 1.6 0.133 0.268 0.336

Crop Group 14 Tree Nuts (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 7-day PHI)

Almond nutmeat 0.355-0.367 7 12 <0.01 0.013 0.123 <0.01 0.011 0.001

Almons hulls 0.355-0.367 7 12 1.04 3.12 3.05 1.68 1.86 0.681

Pecan nutmeat 0.360-0.363

(404-407) 7 12 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 NA

CROP Group 20 (proposed use = 0.266 lb ai/A total application rate, 14-day PHI)

Cotton gin 

byproducts

(14-Day PHI)

0.346-0.375

(389-422) 14-15 42 0.037 4.20 4.03 0.476 0.869 1.12

Cotton, seed 0.346-0.375 14-15 44 <0.01 0.182 0.176 0.019 0.037 0.038
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 112 of 141

Table A3. Summary of Residues from the Crop Field Trials with Sulfoxaflor

(SC formulation unless otherwise specified).

Crop Matrix Applic. Rate

lb ai/A

(g a.i./ha)

PHI 

(days)

n Residues (ppm)

Min Max HAFT1 Median Mean Std. Dev

(14-Day PHI) (389-422)

Canola, seed

(14-Day PHI)

0.078-0.099 

(88.1-110.8) 13-15 36 <0.01 0.224 0.215 0.042 0.054 0.046

Canola, forage

(14-Day PHI)

0.078-0.099 

(88.1-110.8) 13-14 8 0.03 1.5 1.3 0.11 0.39 0.57

Soybean, Seed 0.357-0.371

(400-416) 6-8 36 <0.01 0.214 0.199 0.010 0.026 0.044

1 HAFT = Highest Average Field Trial [Note: For OECD data with 1 sample per trial, this column may be 

removed.] e Includes 0-day PHI samples from trials CEMS-3965C and CEMS-3965D and 1-day PHI samples from 

decline trials CEMS-3965A and CEMS-3965B. f Including Australian trial 080544, for which total rates were 

0.279-0.283 lb a.i./A (314-318 g a.i./ha), ~83% of target application rate; the application range for all other

applications was 0.341-0.379 lb a.i./A (383-426 g a.i./ha). NOTE: all concentrations for min, max, HAFT, median 

and mean are reported in ppm (mg/kg). e Includes hay samples from US Trial 03 that were harvested at an 11-day 

PHI. f Includes hay samples from US Trial 03 that were harvested at an 11-day PHI. g

 Includes samples from Trial 

090760 that were harvested at a 23-day PHI; forage includes samples from Trial 090761 that were harvested at a 14-

day PHI.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 113 of 141

Appendix 4. Field Trial Data and OECD MRL Calculator Output

The OECD tolerance/MRL calculation procedures generates tolerances/MRLs that are based on 

mean field trial values. As a result, the residue values in mg/kg listed in the tables in this 

attachment are the means of the two samples taken at each trial site. 

Root and Tuber Vegetables

Crop Carrots Radish Sugar Beet Potatoes

Region / Country EU; USA USA EU; USA Canada; EU; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 12 6 13 18

% of censored data 33% 50% 69% 100%

Number of non-censored 

data 8 3 4 0

Lowest residue 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010

Highest residue 0.031 0.014 0.023 0.010

Median residue 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.010

Mean 0.015 0.011 0.011 0.010

Standard deviation (SD) 0.008 0.002 0.003 0.000

Correction factor for 

censoring (CF) 0.778 0.667 0.538 0.333

- Highest residue 0.031 0.014 0.023 0.010

- Mean + 4 SD 0.045 0.017 0.025 0.010

- CF x 3 Mean 0.034 0.022 0.018 0.010

Unrounded MRL 0.045 0.022 0.025 0.010

Rounded MRL 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.01

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due to 

small dataset.

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.010 0.011 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.017 0.010 * 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.011 0.010 * 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.011 0.010 * 0.012 0.010 *

0.014 0.014 0.010 0.010 *

0.010 * 0.012 0.023 0.010 *

0.030 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.031 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.013 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.010 * 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.010 0.010 * 0.010 *

0.010 * 0.010 0.010 *

0.010 * 0.010 *

0.010 *

0.010 *

0.010 *

0.010 *
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 114 of 141

0.010 *

Leaves of Root and Tuber Vegetables: Crop Group 2

Crop Carrot Tops Sugar Beet Tops

Region / Country EU; USA EU; US

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 4 13

Percentage of censored data 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 4 13

Lowest residue 0.338 0.152

Highest residue 2.069 1.615

Median residue 0.510 0.639

Mean 0.857 0.740

Standard deviation (SD) 0.815 0.444

Correction factor for censoring 

(CF) 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 2.069 1.615

- Mean + 4 SD 4.115 2.515

- CF x 3 Mean 2.570 2.221

Unrounded MRL 4.115 2.515

Rounded MRL 5 3

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due to 

small dataset.

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

2.069 0.843

0.338 0.853

0.587 0.905

0.432 1.607

0.745

0.370

0.530

0.639

0.555

0.388

0.421

1.615

0.152
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 115 of 141

Bulb Vegetables: Crop Group 3-07

Crop Dry Bulb Onion Green Onion

Region / Country USA USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 6 6

Percentage of censored data 100% 17%

Number of non-censored data 0 5

Lowest residue 0.010 0.010

Highest residue 0.010 0.387

Median residue 0.010 0.109

Mean 0.010 0.132

Standard deviation (SD) 0.000 0.133

Correction factor for censoring 

(CF) 0.333 0.889

- Highest residue 0.010 0.387

- Mean + 4 SD 0.010 0.665

- CF x 3 Mean 0.010 0.351

Unrounded MRL 0.010 0.665

Rounded MRL 0.01 0.07

High uncertainty of MRL due 

to small dataset and high level 

of censoring.

High uncertainty of MRL 

due to small dataset.

Residues (mg/kg)

0.010 * 0.090

0.010 * 0.048

0.010 * 0.128

0.010 * 0.010 *

0.010 * 0.387

0.010 * 0.128
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 116 of 141

Leafy Vegetables Except Brassica: Crop Group 4

Crop Celery Head Lettuce Leaf Lettuce Spinach

Region / Country USA AUS; EU; USA AUS; EU; USA AUS; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data 6 13 16 7

% of censored data 0% 8% 0% 0%

Number of non-censored 

data 6 12 6 7

Lowest residue 0.072 0.010 0.055 0.041

Highest residue 0.771 0.494 2.744 2.863

Median residue 0.185 0.065 0.587 1.038

Mean 0.344 0.160 0.783 1.145

Standard deviation (SD) 0.304 0.177 0.694 0.996

Correction factor for 

censoring (CF) 1.000 0.949 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 0.771 0.494 0.694 2.863

- Mean + 4 SD 1.561 0.869 1.000 5.128

- CF x 3 Mean 1.032 0.454 2.350 3.436

Unrounded MRL 1.561 0.869 3.557 5.128

Rounded MRL 2 0.9 4 6

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due 

to small dataset.

High uncertainty 

of MRL estimate 

due to small 

dataset.

Residues 

(mg/kg)

Residues 

(mg/kg)

Residues 

(mg/kg)

Residues 

(mg/kg)

0.692 0.065 0.930 0.365

0.771 0.035 0.055 1.871

0.158 0.035 0.230 2.863

0.171 0.010 0.170 1.038

0.198 0.321 0.751 0.041

0.072 0.015 0.315 0.405

0.494 1.356 1.434

0.174 0.417

0.236 0.424

0.487 0.183

0.010 * 0.415

0.178 1.069

0.015 1.587

2.744

0.789

1.099
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 117 of 141

Brassica Leafy Vegetables: Crop Group 5

Crop Broccoli Cauliflower Cabbage Mustard Greens

Region / Country AUS; EU; USA AUS; EU AUS; EU; USA USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 15 10 14 7

Percentage of censored data 0% 30% 7% 0%

Number of non-censored data 15 7 13 7

Lowest residue 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.286

Highest residue 1.584 0.055 0.377 0.899

Median residue 0.070 0.014 0.074 0.674

Mean 0.204 0.020 0.092 0.667

Standard deviation (SD) 0.395 0.014 0.098 0.226

Correction factor for censoring 

(CF) 1.000 0.800 0.952 1.000

- Highest residue 1.584 0.055 0.377 0.899

- Mean + 4 SD 1.786 0.075 0.484 1.573

- CF x 3 Mean 0.612 0.047 0.262 2.002

Unrounded MRL 1.786 0.075 0.484 2.002

Rounded MRL 2 0.08 0.5 2

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due 

to small dataset.

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.065 0.010 * 0.150 0.817

0.070 0.055 0.010 0.603

0.073 0.021 0.377 0.674

0.281 0.012 0.081 0.495

0.164 0.014 0.034 0.896

1.584 0.022 0.016 0.286

0.074 0.029 0.066 0.899

0.057 0.014 0.019

0.036 0.010 * 0.097

0.010 0.010 * 0.040

0.393 0.097

0.060 0.010 *

0.117 0.185

0.050 0.101

0.029
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 118 of 141

Soybeans and Dried Shelled Peas and Beans: Crop Subgroup 6C

Crop Dried Shelled Bean Beans, succulent Soybean Seed

Region / Country Brazil; /EU Brazil; /EU Brazil; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 6 6 20

Percentage of censored data 0% 0% 35%

Number of non-censored data 6 6 13

Lowest residue 0.028 0.029 0.010

Highest residue 0.104 1.938 0.199

Median residue 0.077 0.096 0.013

Mean 0.022 0.422 0.029

Standard deviation (SD) 0.104 0.749 0.044

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 0.077 1.000 0.767

- Highest residue 0.104 1.938 0.199

- Mean + 4 SD 0.184 3.418 0.204

- CF x 3 Mean 0.205 1.267 0.067

Unrounded MRL 0.205 3.418 0.204

Rounded MRL 0.2 4 0.2

High uncertainty of MRL estimate 

due to small dataset.

High uncertainty of MRL 

estimate due to small dataset.

High uncertainty of MRL estimate 

due to small dataset.

Residues

(mg/kg)

Residues (mg/kg)

0.080 1.938 0.010 *

0.082 0.116 0.030

0.074 0.072 0.039

0.049 0.076 0.010 *

0.104 0.306 0.010

0.022 0.029 0.013

0.016

0.010 *

0.199

0.028

0.017

0.013

0.010 *

0.010 *

0.010 *

0.034

0.013

0.021

0.010 *

0.085
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 119 of 141

Foliage of Legume Vegetables: Crop Group 7

Crop Soybean Forage Soybean Hay

Region / Country Brazil; USA Brazil; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data 20 20

% of censored data 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 20 20

Lowest residue 0.016 0.016

Highest residue 1.690 1.238

Median residue 0.246 0.691

Mean 0.398 0.662

Standard deviation (SD) 0.415 0.383

Correction factor for censoring 

(CF) 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 1.690 1.238

- Mean + 4 SD 2.059 2.196

- CF x 3 Mean 1.194 1.986

Unrounded MRL 2.059 2.196

Rounded MRL 2 3

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.215 1.014

0.111 1.217

0.217 0.716

0.276 0.245

0.440 0.564

0.526 1.238

0.016 0.016

0.036 0.122

0.187 0.968

0.430 0.667

0.209 0.936

0.157 1.007

0.373 0.127

0.357 0.501

0.397 0.890

1.690 0.869

0.946 0.385

1.141 0.464

0.126 0.246

0.113 1.049
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 120 of 141

Fruiting Vegetables: Crop Group 8-09

Crop Tomatoes (Field) Bell Peppers Non-Bell Peppers

Region / Country AUS; BRZ; EU; USA AUS; EU; USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 44 12 8

Percentage of censored data 2% 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 43 12 8

Lowest residue 0.010 0.010 0.020

Highest residue 0.602 0.256 0.440

Median residue 0.054 0.052 0.086

Mean 0.092 0.096 0.173

Standard deviation (SD) 0.119 0.098 0.161

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 0.985 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 0.602 0.256 0.440

- Mean + 4 SD 0.567 0.486 0.816

- CF x 3 Mean 0.272 0.288 0.520

Unrounded MRL 0.602 0.486 0.816

Rounded MRL 0.6 0.5 0.9

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.025 0.010 0.080

0.050 0.010 0.440

0.015 0.010 0.400

0.015 0.083 0.075

0.015 0.176 0.086

0.030 0.256 0.020

0.074 0.229 0.200

0.035 0.117 0.085

0.096 0.012

0.015 0.015

0.054 0.022

0.085 0.211

0.052

0.022

0.024

0.113

0.035

0.030

0.373

0.057

0.026

0.405

0.076

0.042

0.602

0.054
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 121 of 141

Fruiting Vegetables: Crop Group 8-09

Crop Tomatoes (Field) Bell Peppers Non-Bell Peppers

Region / Country AUS; BRZ; EU; USA AUS; EU; USA AUS; EU; USA

0.047

0.231

0.313

0.150

0.063

0.095

0.010 *

0.030

0.010

0.026

0.150

0.082

0.058

0.061

0.094

0.085

0.077

0.047

Cucurbit Vegetables: Crop Group 9

Crop Cucumbers Squash/Zucchini Melon

(Whole Fruit)

Region / Country AUS; EU; USA USA BRZ; EU; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 18 8 16

Percentage of censored data 0% 50% 0%

Number of non-censored data 18 4 16

Lowest residue 0.010 0.010 0.010

Highest residue 0.152 0.100 0.266

Median residue 0.047 0.011 0.034

Mean 0.055 0.024 0.054

Standard deviation (SD) 0.039 0.031 0.066

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000 0.667 1.000

- Highest residue 0.152 0.100 0.266

- Mean + 4 SD 0.211 0.149 0.317

- CF x 3 Mean 0.166 0.048 0.162

Unrounded MRL 0.211 0.149 0.317

Rounded MRL 0.3 0.15 0.4

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.084 0.010 * 0.043

0.029 0.010 * 0.014
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 122 of 141

Cucurbit Vegetables: Crop Group 9

Crop Cucumbers Squash/Zucchini Melon

(Whole Fruit)

Region / Country AUS; EU; USA USA BRZ; EU; USA

0.031 0.010 * 0.022

0.052 0.018 0.020

0.083 0.011 0.045

0.023 0.010 * 0.014

0.103 0.100 0.036

0.152 0.025 0.133

0.034 0.105

0.062 0.048

0.112 0.010

0.055 0.025

0.010 0.266

0.071 0.038

0.025 0.032

0.041 0.018

0.014

0.018
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 123 of 141

Citrus Fruits: Crop Group 10

Crop Grapefruit Lemon Orange

Region / Country USA USA AUS; BRZ; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 8 5 30

Percentage of censored data 13% 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 7 5 30

Lowest residue 0.010 0.034 0.038

Highest residue 0.130 0.292 0.435

Median residue 0.014 0.051 0.122

Mean 0.041 0.112 0.174

Standard deviation (SD) 0.050 0.109 0.121

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 0.917 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 0.130 0.292 0.435

- Mean + 4 SD 0.241 0.547 0.658

- CF x 3 Mean 0.113 0.335 0.522

Unrounded MRL 0.241 0.547 0.658

Rounded MRL 0.3 0.6 0.7

High uncertainty of MRL 

estimate due to small 

dataset.

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.011 0.136 0.410

0.013 0.051 0.370

0.011 0.292 0.325

0.010 * 0.034 0.085

0.016 0.045 0.150

0.130 0.145

0.024 0.155

0.112 0.430

0.340

0.435

0.280

0.099

0.096

0.283

0.121

0.132

0.098

0.102

0.136

0.123

0.112

0.112

0.074

0.098
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 124 of 141

Citrus Fruits: Crop Group 10

Crop Grapefruit Lemon Orange

Region / Country USA USA AUS; BRZ; USA

0.062

0.048

0.155

0.085

0.120

0.038

Pome Fruit: Crop Group 11-09

Crop Apples Pears

Region / Country AUS/NZ; EU; USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 22 14

Percentage of censored data 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 22 14

Lowest residues 0.011 0.052

Highest residue 0.266 0.261

Median residue 0.071 0.145

Mean 0.088 0.146

Standard deviation (SD) 0.060 0.065

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 0.266 0.261

- Mean + 4 SD 0.327 0.406

- CF x 3 Mean 0.265 0.438

Unrounded MRL 0.327 0.438

Rounded MRL 0.4 0.5

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.185 0.125

0.140 0.220

0.070 0.058

0.100 0.052

0.090 0.184

0.050 0.097

0.185 0.105

0.078 0.176

0.266 0.155

0.074 0.134

0.043 0.176

0.040 0.261
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 125 of 141

Pome Fruit: Crop Group 11-09

Crop Apples Pears

Region / Country AUS/NZ; EU; USA AUS; EU; USA

0.064 0.228

0.036 0.075

0.066

0.121

0.072

0.011

0.039

0.089

0.056

0.068

Stone Fruit: Crop Group 12-09

Crop Apricots Cherries Nectarines Peaches Plums

Region / Country AUS/NZ AUS/NZ; EU; 

USA AUZ;NZ AUS/NZ; EU; USA AUS; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data 

(n) 4 14 6 20 7

% of censored data 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Number of noncensored data 4 14 6 20 7

Lowest residue 0.135 0.345 0.131 0.015 0.022

Highest residue 0.390 1.491 0.232 0.541 0.358

Median residue 0.160 0.848 0.168 0.141 0.066

Mean 0.211 0.895 0.171 0.169 0.104

Standard deviation 

(SD) 0.120 0.334 0.038 0.122 0.116

Correction factor for 

censoring (CF) 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 0.390 1.491 0.232 0.541 0.358

- Mean + 4 SD 0.690 2.230 0.323 0.658 0.568

- CF x 3 Mean 0.634 2.684 0.512 0.507 0.311

Unrounded MRL 0.690 2.684 0.512 0.658 0.568

Rounded MRL 0.7 3 0.6 0.7 0.6

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due 

to small dataset.

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due to 

small dataset.

High uncertainty 

of MRL estimate 

due to small 

dataset.

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.390 0.345 0.131 0.220 0.022

0.160 1.290 0.178 0.272 0.358

0.135 1.491 0.136 0.150 0.091

0.160 0.898 0.157 0.142 0.066

0.770 0.232 0.015 0.053

0.541 0.190 0.100 0.031
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 126 of 141

Stone Fruit: Crop Group 12-09

Crop Apricots Cherries Nectarines Peaches Plums

Region / Country AUS/NZ AUS/NZ; EU; 

USA AUZ;NZ AUS/NZ; EU; USA AUS; USA

0.983 0.119 0.107

0.799 0.109

1.241 0.360

1.221 0.196

1.047 0.541

0.760 0.267

0.586 0.204

0.554 0.083

0.090

0.032

0.054

0.173

0.140

0.116

Grape: Crop Subgroup 13-07F/ Strawberries: Crop Subgroup 13-07G

Crop Grape Strawberry

Region / Country AUS/NZ; EU; USA AUS/NZ; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 33 12

Percentage of censored data 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 33 12

Lowest residues 0.010 0.020

Highest residue 1.550 0.490

Median residue 0.140 0.191

Mean 0.268 0.182

Standard deviation (SD) 0.331 0.115

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000 1.000

- Highest residue 1.550 0.490

- Mean + 4 SD 1.591 0.641

- CF x 3 Mean 0.803 0.547

Unrounded MRL 1.591 0.641

Rounded MRL 2 0.7

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.110 0.020

0.100 0.125

0.140 0.490

0.130 0.210
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 127 of 141

Grape: Crop Subgroup 13-07F/ Strawberries: Crop Subgroup 13-07G

Crop Grape Strawberry

Region / Country AUS/NZ; EU; USA AUS/NZ; USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

0.350 0.065

0.095 0.134

0.205 0.210

1.550 0.203

0.030 0.208

0.010 0.142

0.450 0.191

0.555 0.191

0.146

0.357

0.956

0.291

0.231

0.152

0.099

1.019

0.225

0.457

0.080

0.061

0.106

0.091

0.042

0.035

0.098

0.331

0.078

0.142

0.119
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 128 of 141

Tree Nuts: Crop Group 14

Crop Almond Nutmeat Almond Hulls Pecan Nutmeat

Region / Country USA USA USA

GAP 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298) 0.266 (298)

Total number of data (n) 6 6 6

Percentage of censored data 83% 0% 100%

Number of non-censored data 1 6 0

Lowest residue 0.010 1.219 0.010

Highest residue 0.013 3.055 0.010

Median residue 0.010 1.595 0.010

Mean 0.010 1.864 0.010

Standard deviation (SD) 0.001 0.677 0.000

Correction factor for censoring 

(CF) 0.444 1.000 0.333

- Highest residue 0.013 3.055 0.010

- Mean + 4 SD 0.014 4.570 0.010

- CF x 3 Mean 0.014 5.592 0.010

Unrounded MRL 0.014 5.592 0.010

Rounded MRL 0.015 6 0.01

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due to 

small dataset and 

high level of 

censoring.

High 

uncertainty of 

MRL estimate 

due to small 

dataset.

High uncertainty of 

MRL estimate due to 

small dataset and 

high level of 

censoring.

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.010 * 3.055 0.010 *

0.010 * 1.675 0.010 *

0.010 * 1.515 0.010 *

0.013 1.219 0.010 *

0.010 * 1.475 0.010 *

0.010 * 2.245 0.010 *
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 129 of 141

Wheat, and Barley Grain: Crop Group 15

Crop Wheat Grain Barley Grain

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada/USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.09 (101) 0.09 (101)

Total number of data (n) 33 23

Percentage of censored data 27 0%

Number of non-censored data 24 23

Lowest residue 0.010 0.010

Highest residue 0.063 0.320

Median residue

0.015

0.055

Mean 0.020 0.061

Standard deviation (SD) 0.013 0.062

Correction factor for censoring 

(CF) 0.818 1.000

- Highest residue 0.063 0.320

- Mean + 4 SD 0.074 0.307

- CF x 3 Mean 0.049 0.183

Unrounded MRL 0.074 0.320

Rounded MRL 0.08 0.4

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.015 0.055

0.035 0.320

0.04 0.025

0.01 0.105

0.01 * 0.075

0.015 0.010

0.01 * 0.016

0.02495 0.057

0.01 * 0.060

0.01 * 0.056

0.0225 0.043

0.027 0.015

0.018 0.079

0.01 * 0.058

0.02 0.020

0.0135 0.045

0.0315 0.043

0.0185 0.061

0.0125 0.044

0.056 0.026

0.012 0.033

0.011 0.088

0.01475 0.073
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 130 of 141

Wheat, and Barley Grain: Crop Group 15

Crop Wheat Grain Barley Grain

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada/USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.09 (101) 0.09 (101)

0.01

0.01

0.0203

0.01 *

0.01 *

0.0122

0.01

0.01 *

0.05795

0.01 *
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 131 of 141

Cereal Grain Forage: Crop Group 16

Crop Wheat Forage Barley Forage

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada/USA NA

GAP 0.09 (101) NA

Total number of data (n) 29

Percentage of censored data 0%

Number of non-censored data 29

Lowest residue 0.011

Highest residue 0.950

Median residue 0.095

Mean 0.146

Standard deviation (SD) 0.184

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000

Highest residue 0.950

- Mean + 4 SD 0.880

- CF x 3 Mean 0.437

Unrounded MRL 0.950

Rounded MRL 1

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.950

0.095

0.389

0.118

0.112

0.051

0.016

0.226

0.186

0.371

0.033

0.066

0.174

0.150

0.020

0.103

0.035

0.070

0.294

0.065

0.024

0.092

0.052

0.099

0.086

0.011
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 132 of 141

Cereal Grain Forage: Crop Group 16

Crop Wheat Forage Barley Forage

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada/USA NA

GAP 0.09 (101) NA

0.105

0.197

0.042

Cereal Grain Hay: Crop Group 16

Crop Wheat Hay Barley Hay

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada; USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.09 (101) 0.09 (101)

Total number of data (n) 29 19

Percentage of censored data 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 29 19

Lowest residue 0.016 0.016

Highest residue 0.848 0.642

Median residue 0.214 0.254

Mean 0.276 0.258

Standard deviation (SD) 0.204 0.174

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000 1.000

Highest residue 0.848 0.642

- Mean + 4 SD 1.092 0.953

- CF x 3 Mean 0.829 0.775

Unrounded MRL 1.092 0.953

Rounded MRL 1.5 1

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.263 0.200

0.532 0.197

0.418 0.642

0.533 0.212

0.209 0.037

0.216 0.405

0.016 0.016

0.600 0.041

0.074 0.254

0.313 0.434

0.087 0.357

0.341 0.030

0.188 0.377

0.493 0.388

0.280 0.123
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 133 of 141

Cereal Grain Hay: Crop Group 16

Crop Wheat Hay Barley Hay

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada; USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.09 (101) 0.09 (101)

0.571 0.465

0.104 0.307

0.848 0.314

0.411 0.115

0.152

0.048

0.199

0.214

0.026

0.082

0.345

0.194

0.159

0.104

Cereal Grain Straw: Crop Group 16

Crop Wheat Straw Barley Straw

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada; USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.09 (101) 0.09 (101)

Total number of data (n) 34 22

Percentage of censored data 0% 0%

Number of non-censored data 34 22

Lowest residue 0.016 0.016

Highest residue 1.599 1.455

Median residue 0.260 0.157

Mean 0.390 0.273

Standard deviation (SD) 0.408 0.325

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000 1.000

Highest residue 1.599 1.455

- Mean + 4 SD 2.022 1.572

- CF x 3 Mean 1.170 0.819

Unrounded MRL 2.022 1.572

Rounded MRL 2 2

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.285 0.215

1.400 1.455
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 134 of 141

Cereal Grain Straw: Crop Group 16

Crop Wheat Straw Barley Straw

Region / Country AUS/NZ; BRZ; EU; Canada; USA AUS; EU; USA

GAP 0.09 (101) 0.09 (101)

0.410 0.030

0.055 0.240

0.295 0.100

0.460 0.090

0.016 0.016

1.061 0.216

0.084 0.128

0.052 0.584

0.218 0.530

0.107 0.375

0.346 0.051

0.491 0.073

0.234 0.106

0.179 0.121

0.616 0.319

0.507 0.524

0.321 0.186

0.209 0.024

0.319 0.044

0.815 0.587

0.623

0.310

0.063

0.113

0.222

0.114

0.043

0.169

1.341

0.071

1.599

0.115
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 135 of 141

Oilseed Crops: Crop Group 20

Crop Canola Cottonseed Cotton Gin Bypds

Region / Country AUS; EU; Canada; 

USA

AUS; BRZ; EU; USA AUS; BRZ; EU; USA

GAP 0.09(101) 0.266(298) 0.266(298)

Total number of data 20 22 21

% of censored data 0% 14% 0%

Number of noncensored data 20 19 21

Lowest residue 0.010 0.010 0.042

Highest residue 0.215 0.176 4.026

Median residue 0.043 0.022 0.486

Mean 0.053 0.037 0.869

Standard deviation 

(SD) 0.044 0.038 1.126

Correction factor for 

censoring (CF) 1.000 0.909 1.000

- Highest residue 0.215 0.176 4.026

- Mean + 4 SD 0.228 0.190 5.373

- CF x 3 Mean 0.158 0.101 2.608

Unrounded MRL 0.228 0.190 5.373

Rounded MRL 0.3 0.2 6

Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg) Residues (mg/kg)

0.020 0.010 * 0.115

0.085 0.015 0.590

0.060 0.080 3.850

0.010 0.045 1.600

0.038 0.039 1.517

0.027 0.010 * 0.514

0.057 0.014 0.351

0.072 0.042 0.926

0.043 0.080 0.413

0.215 0.011 0.355

0.076 0.070 0.486

0.051 0.010 * 0.234

0.033 0.027 1.400

0.035 0.013 0.893

0.010 0.031 0.188

0.017 0.043 0.577

0.047 0.041 0.042

0.072 0.010 0.048

0.042 0.015 0.073

0.042 0.016 0.061

0.017 4.026

0.176
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 136 of 141

Appendix 5. Individual MRLs for Representative Commodities and Crop Group MRLs

Sulfoxaflor: U.S. Recommended MRLs for Plant Commodities

 Determined Using OECD MRL Calculator

Crop Group Representative Crops

Maximum Individual 

Residue Values

(ppm)

Individual MRL

(ppm)

Proposed

Crop Group MRL

Crop Group

1

(7-Day PHI)

Carrot (roots) 0.03 0.05

0.05 ppm for all crops of 

Crop Group 1

Radish (roots) 0.02 0.03

Sugar beet (roots) 0.03 0.03

Potato (tubers) <0.01 0.01

Processed commodities:

Carrot juice

Potato flakes

Potato chips

Potato dried

Potato, peel, wet

Sugar beet, sugar, refined

Sugar beet, molasses

 HAFT x PF =

0.031 x 2.4 = 0.07

0.01 x 2.5 = 0.025

0.01 x 2.1 = 0.025

0.01 x 3.6 = 0.036

0.01 x 1.8 = 0.018

0.023 x 0.8 = 0.02

0.023 x 10.0 = 0.23

NA

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

0.25

NR = Not required, all less 

than the crop group tolerance.

NA - HED does not set 

tolerances for carrot juice.

Sugar beet, molasses at 

0.25 ppm

Crop Group

2

(7-Day PHI)

Sugar beet tops (leaves) 1.69 3.0 3.0 ppm for all crops of

Crop Group 2

(representative crops are 

turnips and beets)

Radish tops 0.51 1.0

Crop 

subgroups

3-07A

3-07B

(7-Day PHI)

Subgroup 3-07A

Onion, bulb subgroup <0.01 0.01 0.01 ppm

for subgroup 3-07A

Subgroup 3-07B

Onion, green subgroup 0.44 0.7

0.7 ppm

for subgroup 3-07B

Crop Group

4

(3-Day PHI)

Celery (4B) 0.80 2.0 6.0 ppm for subgroup 4A 

2.0 ppm for subgroup 4B

(translate 4A data for 

Watercress)

Head lettuce (4A) 0.53 0.9

Leaf lettuce (4A) 3.07 4.0

Spinach (4A) 3.26 6.0

Crop Group

5

(3-Day PHI)

Broccoli 1.60 2.0

2.0 ppm

for all crops of Group 5

Cauliflower 0.07 0.08

Cabbage (w wrapper leaves) 0.40 0.5

Mustard Greens 1.17 2.0

Crop Group

6

(7-DayPHI)

Beans (succulent) 2.02 4.0 4.0 ppm Beans, succulent

Dry beans 0.11 0.2 0.2 ppm Beans, dry

Soybeans 0.214 0.2 (0.3)*

0.2 ppm Soybean, seed

(* 0.3 when the highest individual 

value 0.214 ppm was used instead 

of the average for one field trial) 

Processed commodities:

Soybean hulls

Soybean meal

Soybean, oil, refined

HAFT x PF =

0.013 x 1.5 = 0.02 (NR)

0.013 x 1.3 = 0.02 (NR)

0.013 x 0.1 = 0.001 (NR)

NR = Not required, soybean 

seed tolerance is 0.2 ppm.
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 137 of 141

Sulfoxaflor: U.S. Recommended MRLs for Plant Commodities

 Determined Using OECD MRL Calculator

Crop Group Representative Crops

Maximum Individual 

Residue Values

(ppm)

Individual MRL

(ppm)

Proposed

Crop Group MRL

Crop Group

8

(1-Day PHI)

Tomato 0.76 0.6 0.9 ppm for all crops of

Bell pepper Crop Group 8-09 0.28 0.5

Non-bell pepper 0.46 0.9

Processed commodities:

Tomato paste

Tomato puree

HAFT x PF

0.602 x 4.4 = 2.6 ppm

0.602 x 2.0 = 1.2 ppm

2.6 ppm for tomato paste

1.2 ppm for tomato puree

Crop Group

9

(1-Day PHI)

Cucumber 0.17 0.3

0.4 ppm for all crops of

Crop Group 9 Squash 0.02 0.15

Melon 0.30 0.4

Crop Group 

10

(1-Day PHI)

Grapefruit <0.01 0.3

0.7 ppm for all crops of

Crop Group 10 Lemon 0.32 0.6

Oranges 0.46 0.7

Processed commodities:

Citrus, peel

Citrus, pulp, dried

Citrus, oil

Citrus juice

HAFT x PF

0.435 x 9.13 = 4.0 ppm

0.435 x 8.3 = 3.6 ppm

0.435 x 0.2 = 0.09 ppm

0.435 x 0.2 = 0.09 ppm

4.0 ppm for Citrus, peel

3.6 ppm for Citrus, dried,

 pulp

Citrus oil and citrus juice

tolerances are not required; 

both are less than the crop 

group tolerance.

Crop Group

11

(7-Day PHI)

Apple 0.30 0.4 0.5 ppm for all crops of Crop 

Group 11-09

Apple juice tolerance is not 

required; it is less than the 

crop group tolerance.

Pear 0.27 0.5

Processed commodities:

Apple, pomace, wet

Apple juice

HAFT x PF

0.266 x 1.1 = 0.29 ppm (NR)

0.266 x 0.4 = 0.11 ppm (NR)

Crop Group

12

(7-Day PHI)

Apricot 0.45 0.7

3.0 ppm for all crops of Crop 

Group 12-09.

Cherry 1.60 3.0

Nectarine 0.25 0.6

Peach 0.64 0.7

Plum 0.36 0.6

Processed commodities:

Cherry, dried

Prune

HAFT x PF

1.49 x 5.2 = 7.7 ppm

0.358 x 5.2 = 1.9 ppm

(use PF from dried cherry)

Tolerances are not set for 

dried cherries.

Plum, dried tolerance is not 

required; it is less than the 

crop group tolerance.

Crop Group

13-07F Grape 1.9 2.0 2.0 ppm for all crops of Crop Subgroup 13-07F
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 138 of 141

Sulfoxaflor: U.S. Recommended MRLs for Plant Commodities

 Determined Using OECD MRL Calculator

Crop Group Representative Crops

Maximum Individual 

Residue Values

(ppm)

Individual MRL

(ppm)

Proposed

Crop Group MRL

(7-Day PHI) Processed commodities:

Grape, raisin

Grape juice

HAFT x PF

1.55 x 3.5 = 5.4 ppm

1.56 x 0.8 = 1.25 ppm (NR)

6.0 ppm for Grape, raisin in 

order to harmonize with 

proposed CODEX MRL

Crop Group

13-07G

(1-Day PHI)

Strawberry 0.50 0.7 0.7 ppm for all crops of Crop 

Subgroup 13-07G

Crop Group

14

(7-Day PHI)

Almond 0.013 0.015 0.015 ppm for all crops of 

Crop Group 14-11

(Pistachio requires a 

tolerance, not yet a crop 

group member.)

Pecan <0.01 0.01

Crop Group

15

(Barley and 

Wheat only)

(14-Day PHI)

Wheat 0.07 0.08 0.08 ppm for wheat, grain

Processed commodities:

Wheat, bran

Wheat, flour

Wheat, middlings

Wheat, shorts

Wheat, germ

HAFT x PF

0.063 x 0.4 = 0.03

0.063 x 0.2 = 0.01

0.063 x 0.2 = 0.01

0.063 x 0.2 = 0.01

0.063 x 0.5 = 0.03

Wheat processed commodity 

tolerances are not required, 

they are all less than the 

wheat, grain tolerance.

Barley 0.37 0.4 0.4 ppm for barley, grain

Processed commodities:

Barley, pearled

Barley, flour

Barley, bran

HAFT x PF

0.32 x 0.7 = 0.22

0.32 x 0.8 = 0.26

0.32 x 1.0 = 0.32

Barley processed commodity 

tolerances are not required;

they are all less than the 0.4 

ppm barley grain tolerance.

Crop Group

20

(14-Day PHI)

Canola 0.224 0.3 0.4 ppm for all crops of Crop 

Group 20A (to harmonize 

with CODEX)

0.5 ppm for Canola meal

0.4 ppm for all crops of Crop 

Group 20C

Processed commodities:

Canola meal

Canola, oil, refined

HAFT x PF

0.215 x 1.9 = 0.41

0.215 x 0.3 = 0.07

Cottonseed 0.18 0.2

Processed food 

commodities:

Cotton, oil, refined

HAFT x PF

0.176 x 0.1 = 0.02

Not required, below the RAC 

tolerance.

Livestock Feed Commodities

Crop Group

1

Sugar beet, dried pulp HAFT x PF = 0.023 x 3.0 = 0.02 0.07 ppm

Sugar beet molasses HAFT x PF = 0.023 x 10.0 = 0.23 0.25 ppm

Sugar beet, tops 1.62 3.0 3.0 ppm 

Processed potato waste HAFT x PF = 0.01 x 4.0 = 0.04 Not required, less than the 

RAC tolerance.

Crop Group 7 Vegetables, legume, foliage 1.4 3.0 3.0 ppm for Crop Group 7
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 139 of 141

Sulfoxaflor: U.S. Recommended MRLs for Plant Commodities

 Determined Using OECD MRL Calculator

Crop Group Representative Crops

Maximum Individual 

Residue Values

(ppm)

Individual MRL

(ppm)

Proposed

Crop Group MRL

(hay)

Vegetables, legume, foliage, 

vines/forage 1.73 2.0 Use the higher 3.0 for group 7

Crop Group 

10 Citrus, pulp, dried HAFT x PF = 0.435 x 8.3 = 3.61 3.6 ppm

Crop Group

11 Wet apple pomace HAFT x PF = 0.266 x 1.1 = 0.29 Not required, Pome fruit tolerance is 0.5 ppm. 

Crop Group

14 Almond Hulls 3.12 ppm 6.0 6.0 ppm for almond hulls

Crop Group 

15 and 

Soybeans

Aspirated Grain Fractions

Soybeans

Wheat

0.199 x 95 = 18.9

0.063 x 21 = 1.32

18.9 ppm

1.3 ppm

20.0 ppm for aspirated grain 

fractions (AGF), (rounded to 

20.0 ppm).

Soybean meal HAFT x PF = 0.013 x 1.3 = 0.02 Not required, soybean seed 

tolerance is 0.2 ppm.

Soybean hulls HAFT x PF = 0.013 x 1.5 = 0.02 Not required, soybean seed 

tolerance is 0.2 ppm.

Soybean forage 1.69 2.0 Covered by Crop Group 7 at 

Soybean hay 1.24 3.0 3.0 ppm

Wheat milled byproducts HAFT x PF = 0.063 x 0.2 = 0.01

(used wheat shorts PF = 0.2X)

Not required, wheat grain 

tolerance is 0.08 ppm.

Crop Group 

16

Grain, Cereal, hay Barley - 0.64

Wheat - 1.02

(7-Day PHI)

Barley - 1.0

Wheat - 1.5

Barley, hay - 1.0 ppm

Wheat, hay - 1.5 ppm

Grain, Cereal, forage

Barley - NA

Wheat - 1.4

(HAFT = 0.95)

(7-Day PHI)

Barley - NA

Wheat - 1.0

Barley, forage - NA

Wheat, forage - 1.0 ppm

(tolerance is higher than the HAFT,

but lower than the maximum 

residue) 

Grain, Cereal, straw

Barley - 2.2

(HAFT = 1.45)

Wheat - 1.56

(7-Day PHI)

Barley - 2.0

Wheat - 2.0

Barley, straw - 2.0 ppm

(tolerance is higher than the HAFT, 

but lower than the maximum 

residue)

Wheat, straw - 2.0 ppm

Crop Group

20

(14-Day PHI)

Cotton Gin Byproducts 4.20 ppm 6.0 6.0ppm for cotton gin bypd

Cotton meal HAFT x PF = 0.176 x 0.8 = 0.14 Not required, cottonseed 

RAC tolerance is 0.2 ppm.

Cotton hulls 0.176 x 1.8 = 0.32

0.35 ppm for Cotton hulls, 

other commodities are below 

the RAC tolerance.

Rapeseed, meal 0.215 x 1.9 = 0.41 ppm 0.5 ppm for Rapeseed meal
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 140 of 141

Appendix 6. Structures of Important Metabolites and Degradates Found in Metabolism 

Studies, Confined Rotational Crop Study, Crop Field Trials, Livestock Feeding Studies, 

and Environmental Fate Studies.

Table A.6. Identification of Compounds from XDE-208 Metabolism Studies

Common name/code

ID No.

Chemical name 

(IUPAC)

Chemical structure

Sulfoxaflor 

(XDE-208)

[1-(6-

trifluoromethylpyridin-3-

yl)ethyl](methyl)-oxido-λ6-

sulfanylidenecyanamide

X11719474 N-(methyl)oxido){1-[6-

(trifluoromethyl)pyridine-3-

yl]ethyl}-λ6-sulfanylidene) 

urea

N

S

N O

N

O

F

F

F

X11721061 1-[6-

(trifluoromethyl)pyridin-3-

yl]ethanol

N

OH

F

F

F

X11863595, 

Glucose 

conjugate of 

X11721061

1-[6-

(trifluoromethyl)pyridine-3-

yl]ethyl D-glucopyranoside

X11889781, 

Glucose plus 

malonyl 

conjugate of 

X11721061

1-[6-

(trifluoromethyl)pyridine-3-

yl]ethyl -6’-O-malonyl Dglucopyranoside

X11519540 5-(1-methanesulfonylethyl)-2-trifluoromethylpyridine

O

N

F

F F

O

OH

OH

OH

OH

O

N

F

F F

O

OH

OH

OH

O

O O

OH

N

S

O

F O

F

F
Sulfoxaflor Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data Barcode 398756

Page 141 of 141

Table A.6. Identification of Compounds from XDE-208 Metabolism Studies

Common name/code

ID No.

Chemical name 

(IUPAC)

Chemical structure

X11821639 3-[6-tri

fluoromethyl)pyridin-3-

yl]butanoic acid

N

F

F

F

OH

O

Laying Hen and Ruminant Metabolism Study

X11596066 1-[6-(trifluoromethyl)pyridin3-yl]ethane

N

F

F

F

X11721061 1-[6-

(trifluoromethyl)pyridin-3-

yl]ethanol

N

OH

F

F

F

Crop Rotation Study

X11579457 5-[1-(Smethylsulfonimidoyl)ethyl]

-2-(trifluoromethyl)pyridine

Metabolite 1 Unknown

N

S

N O H

CF3

N

S

N O

O

CF3 N

+ O