UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

### MAY 3 ·0 2012

MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

SUBJECT: BEAD Chemical Profile for Registration Review: Iprodione (109801) FROM:

THRU:

TO: Carl Chen, Plant Pathologist Biological Analysis Branch Jihad Alsadek, Economist Science Information and Analysis Branch __. 

### ---=-**~** Derek Berwald, Economist

# ~c.---;?' Economic Analysis Branch Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) Arnet Jones, Chief Biological Analysis Branch

# ~ u,._..._. Diann Sims, Chief

# D·~~ry--- Science Information and Analysis Branch Timothy Kiely, Chief 

# 9:\;\/\_**~** Economic Analysis Branch j Biological and Economic Analys Division (75 ) James Parker, Chemical Review Manager Risk Management and Implementation Branch 1 Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P)


### Product Review Panel date: May 16, 2012 INTRODUCTION The purpose ofthis document is to convey usage information and a broad overview ofthe pest management roles ofpesticides that are beginning to undergo registration review. The anticipated audience consists ofthe team ofEPA staffcurrently evaluating the registration status ofiprodione, and eventually the general public. This document builds upon the data already provided 

### inthe "Usage and Label Use DataPackages" that are also provided to Registration 

### 1Reviewteams by BEAD. The document is based on information and data available to BEAD as ofMay 2012. lprodione is in a group ofdicarboximide fungicides with a mode ofaction inhibiting the MAP/Histidine-Kinase in osmotic signal transduction. This is a contact fungicide with protective and curative action (BC Agriculture, 2004), and is used to control many fungal diseases such as Monilinia taxa on almonds, Sclerotinia spp. onlettuce, andAlternaria spp. on carrots and onions. Onturfgrass, iprodione mayprovide goodto excellentpreventative control ofdollar spot and Helminthosporium leafspots, and moderate to good brownpatch activity (Pettis and Guillebeau, 2004). Iprodione also has nematicidal activities (Patent 20090209605), and has recently been registered as Enclosure® 4 Plowable Fungicide andNematicide (EPA Reg. No. 86153-3) to control nematodes on crops such as carrots, cotton, and peanuts. 

### COMMON FORMULATIONS AND APPLICATIONMETHODS lprodione is formulated as water dispersible granules, emulsifiable and soluble concentrate. Irrigation systems may be considered as application methods. 

### USE SITES Agricultural Use Sites lprodione is a fungicide registered for use on bushberries, caneberries, almonds, stone fruits, pome fruits, poppy, marigold, brassica cole crops, leafy and stem vegetables, carrots, onions, potatoes, bulb vegetables, beans, forage legumes, rice, ginseng, palm, cotton, peanuts and rapeseed. Non-Agricultural Use Sites lprodione is also registered for use onforest trees, herbaceous plants (flowering and foliage types), ornamental plants, ornamental lawns and turf, ornamental woody shrubs and vines, ornamental trees, and for commercial, industrial and institutional maintenance. 

### USAGE Agricultural Usage Sites Figures 1 and 2 showiprodione usage trends in terms oftotal pounds used. Figure 1 shows a decline inthe use ofiprodione from 2000 to 2002, and fluctuations in usage from 2003-2010.

2Figure 1. Agricultural Usage Data for Iprodione in Pounds 

### A.I. on All Crops, 2000-2010

PoundsA.I.

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Years Source: Proprietary Data, 2000

- 2010 Figure 2 provides usage data for from 2006-2010. The use ofiprodione on almonds increased from 2006 to 2007, decreased in 2008 and increased thereafter. The use on lettuce increased in 2007 and then decreased and kept steady from 2008 to 2010, but use was less than halfofthe 2007 high. The use on onions decreased from 2006 to 2008 and increased from 2008 to 2010, while the use on carrots fluctuated during this timeframe. The use on other crops was highest in 2009; otherwise the use was almost steady during 2006-2010. Figure 2. Agricultural Usage Data for Iprodione, 2006-2010 300,000

PoundsA.I.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Years -+-Almonds**Lettuce**

.....,_Onions**Carrots**

_.. Other

Other crops include green beans and cherries (5% each), peaches (4%), plums/prunes and apricots (2% each), and tobacco/potatoes/caneberries/and garlic (1% each). Source: Proprietary Data, 2006-2010 From 2006-2010, the annual total agricultural usage averaged approximately 440,000 pounds active ingredient (a.i.) for 700,000 treated acres with an overall application rate of0.6lbs. a.i. per acre. 3During this timeframe, the crops withthe most use interms oftotal pounds ofactive ingredient and total areatreated are almonds, lettuce, onions, and carrots, Table 1. On average, the states with the most agricultural usage interms ofpounds a.i. applied are California (76%), Arizona (8%), Georgia and Oregon (4% each).


### T bl 1 C



### a e . 

### 'th th H' h t U f 

### I d' rops WI 

### e IgJ 

### es se o Lpro 

### 10ne, 2006-2010 Total Lbs A.I. Total Area Crop (%) Treated(%) Almonds 46 57 Lettuce 18 11 Onions 

### 9 9 Carrots 6 5 Source: Propnetary Data, 2006-2010.
Iprodione's Agricultural Usage by Crop Reporting District Another measure ofusage is the use intensity. Inthis analysis, the use intensity is expressed as the pounds a.i. applied per acre ofland in farms. This differs from the application rate, whjchis expressed as the pounds a.i. applied pertreated acre. Figure 3 spatiallyrepresents iprodione's use intensity inthe US. Areas where the intensity ofuse is higher can be seen onthe map, such as the southernpart ofthe Central Valley ofCaliforniawhere almonds are grown and coastal California and SouthernArizona, which are lettuce growing areas. The area ofhigh intensity in Georgiaprobably reflects use as a fungicide on onion. This intensity may reflect the importance ofiprodione for production inthis area, as use in Georgia is higher inmany years than states with substantially larger onion acreage.

4

### Figure 3. lprodione Usage by 

### Crop Reporting District (2006-2010)

Average Pounds Per 1.000 Acres of Farmland

. 0
.0-0
.7 0
.8-2
.3 0 2.4

- 4
.7 4
.8-15.4 15
.5- 30

This is a map ofagricultural pesticide usage at the Crop Reporting District (CRD) level. CRDs are boundaries created byUSDA NASS which are aggregates ofcounties (USDA, 2010). Pesticide usage is displayed as average pounds (for the years 2006-2010) per 1,000 acres offarmland in a CRD to normalize for the variation in farmland between CRDs. Farmland acreage was obtained from USDA (2007). Usage is based on private market surveys of pesticide use in agriculture (Proprietary Data, 2006- 2010). The survey data are limited to the states that represent the top 80-90% of acreage for the individual crops; therefore, use may be occurring in regions outside the scope ofthe survey. CRDs showing no usage ofpesticides may be due to either the lack ofpesticide use in the region or nonparticipation in the agricultural surveys. In addition, across the years, there may be variations in the specific crops included in the CRD survey. This may result in a lower annual average for the CRD. 

### Non-Agricultural Use The use ofiprodione, Table 2, on golfcourses increased from 187,000 lbs
. a.i. in 2002 to 227,000 lbs. a.i. in 2004 and then decreased to 195,000 lbs a.i. in 2006. The use on institutional turfincreased almost three fold, 5000 lbs a.i. in 2004 to 15,000 lbs. a.i. in 2006. The use on landscape increased by 1,000 lbs. a.i. from 2,000 lbs. a.i. in 2002 to 3,000 lbs. a.i
. in 2004. The use ofthis chemical by lawn care operators (LCOs) increased from 14,000 lbs. a.i. in 2002 to 17,000 lbs. a.i
. in 2004
. The use ofiprodione innurseries and greenhouses decreased from 43,000 lbs. a.i. in 2002 to 14,000 lbs. a.i. in 2006. There was almost 1,000 lbs. a.i. ofiprodione


### 5used onturffarms in 2006. Total pounds ofiprodione increased in2004 andthen decreased in 2006. 

### T bl 2 P a e . ound fi d" 

### so Lpro 10ne A lidti N A . I**~ppl** 

### e or on- .gricu tura IU 

### ses Pounds A.I. Applied Segment/Site 2002 GolfCourses 187,000 Institutional Turf N/A Landscape 2,000 Lawn Care Operators (LCOs) 14,000 Nurseries/Greenhouses 43,000 TurfFarms N/A 

### Total 246,000 Note: N/A means data are not available Source: Kline and Company, Inc., 2002-2006 2004 227,000

5,000 3,000 17,000 30,000

N/A 282,000



### BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS RELEVANT TO IPRODIONE 2006 195,000 15,000 N/A N/A 14,000 1,000 225,000

Iprodione is a Group 2 fungicide. This group in general has a medium to highrisk inresistance development. Resistance is common inBotrytis (FRAC, 2012a) and some otherfungal diseases such as Sclerotinia minor on lettuce that is a resistant pathogento Group 2 fungicides (FRAC, 2012b). Cross resistance is commonbetweenthe group members (FRAC, 2012a). Iprodione as a Group 2 fungicide maybe used in a programto alternate ormix-use with another group of fungicides inresistance management. Iprodione is recommended for disease control in some important agricultural and non-agricultural commodities such almonds and golfcourse turfgrass (California IPM, 2009). Iprodione was originally registered to control fungal diseases, and the use ofiprodione as a nematicide is a newuse pattern, first labeled for use onpeanut in 2009. PDMR (2009) reports indicate there were attempts to test and evaluate the potential ofiprodione as an alternative to fumigant nematicides such as Telone and Vapamto control root-knot nematodes, the major nematode problem ofnumerous crops. The use ofiprodione as a nematicide needs to be identified and reported in usage data inthe future to demonstrate its potential as an alternative to othernematicides. Inresistance management, itis generally not a concern for nematodes to develop resistance to iprodione (Chitwood, 2002). 

### IDSTORY OF BEAD ASSESSMENTS FORIPRODIONE BEAD has not assessed the benefits for iprodione. Prior BEAD work includes an evaluation of alternatives for newuses ofiprodione on canola, canola seed, andpistachio (Kaul, 2006). Inthat case, BEAD concludedthat effective alternatives to iprodione exist, butiprodione mightbe useful as a replacement for vinclozolin, a fungicide ofthe same group that is being phased out. BEAD has also projected the maximumpercent crop treated for newuses ofiprodione as a nematicide on fruiting vegetables (peppers, bell and non-bell peppers, tomatoes, both fresh and processed, and eggplant), cucurbits (cantaloupes, honeydew melon, cucumbers, summer squash, and watermelons), andpercent share ofcanola oil imports. This reportedthat no data showed 

### 6use ofiprodione as a nematicide, despite beingregistered onpeanut, cotton, and carrot (Alsadek and Chen, 2011). DATA NEEDS RELEVANT TO BEAD'S FUTURE WORK ON IPRODIONE Obtaining additional information onthe following items would improve future BEAD assessments ofthe importance ofIprodione and may be required as part ofthe registration review ofthis pesticide. -Additional data on forest trees, herbaceous plants (flowering and foliage types), and for commercial, industrial and institutional maintenance, would improve future BEAD assessment for the registration ofthis chemical. -Usage information ofiprodione as a nematicide. -Non-agricultural usage information, including the sectors shown in Table 2 (GolfCourses, Institutional Turf, Landscape, Lawn Care Operators, TurfFarms, Nursery/Greenhouse, Aquatic Areas, Consumer -Lawn, and Consumer-Fertilizer Combinations) for 2006 onwards.

REFERENCES: Alsadek, Jihad, and Carl Chen, New Percent Crop Treated (PCTn)for Iprodione onAllNon-Bell Peppers,Balsam Pear, BellPeppers, Cantaloupes, Casaba, Chayote Fruit, Chinese Waxgourd, Cucumbers, Eggplant, Honeydew Melon, Okra, Pumpkins, Squash, Tomatillo, Tomatoes, Watermelons (Fresh andProcessed), and Canota OilPercentShare of Imports (PC# 109801, DP # 389852) December 6, 2011 BC Agriculture. 2004. Pesticide Info Sheet

- Iprodione. British Columbia, Ministry of Agriculture. http:/ /www.al.gov.bc.ca/pesticides/infosheets/iprodione.pdf California IPM. 2009. UC Pest Management Guidelines. UC IPM Online. http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops-agriculture.html Chitwood, DJ. 2002. Nematicides. USDA Agricultural Research Service. http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/43874/1/IND44430492.pdf FRAC. 2012a. FRAC Code List. Fungicide Resistance Action Committee. http://www.frac.info/frac/index.htm FRAC. 2012b. List ofResistant Plant Pathogens. Fungicide Resistance Action Committee. http://www.frac.info/frac/publication/ anhang/List-of-resistant-plant-pathogens 2012.pdf Kaul, Monisha. Preliminary Alternatives Assessment for lprodione use on Canola, Canola Seed, and Pistachios, DP# 328771 May 30, 2006. Kline and Company, Inc., 2002-2006 7PDMR. 2000-2011. Plant Disease Management Reports (PDMR) (Vol. 1-5 2007-2011 online; Fungicide 

### & Nematicide Tests Vol. 55-61 2000-2006 online; Biological and Cultural Tests (Vol. 16-21 2001-2006 online). http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/trial/pdmr/ Pettis GV, Guillebeau P. 2004. Pest Management Strategic Plan for Turfgrass in the Southern United States. Southern Region Integrated Pest Management Center. Proprietary Data, 2000-2010 USDA, 2006-2010. NASS Crop Reporting Districts. Online: http:/ /www.ers.usda.gov /briefing/arms/resourceregions/resourceregions.htm#nass
. USDA, 2007. Census ofAgriculture. Online: http://www.agcensus.usda.gov /Publications/2007 /index.asp
.

8