Appendix F. Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data 

This appendix is a summary of the toxicity data evaluated for ecological effect on 

terrestrial organisms. Each section consists of several sets of toxicity data. Tables 

presenting the data submitted by the registrant are presented first. The lowest value from 

this data is used to set a “toxicity reference value” that was used in evaluating the data 

from the open literature—from EPA’s ECOTOX database. Only the studies associated 

with the ECOTOX database that have values less than these toxicity reference values are 

examined further. If any of these latter values are acceptable, then that value becomes the 

final value in the risk assessment for that particular taxonomic group. 

I. Acute Exposure Studies with Birds 

Submitted Data for Avian Acute Oral Toxicity 

An acute oral toxicity study using the technical grade of the active ingredient (TGAI) is 

required to establish the toxicity of endosulfan to birds. The preferred test species is 

either mallard duck (a waterfowl) or bobwhite quail (an upland game bird). Acute oral 

toxicity data are available for 3 species of birds (bobwhite quail, mallard duck, and ringnecked pheasant) and range from 28 to > 320 mg/kg bw (Table F-1). Since the lowest 

LD50 (28 mg/kg), falls in the range of 10 to 50 mg/kg, endosulfan is categorized as highly 

toxic to avian species on an acute oral basis. The avian acute oral toxicity study 

requirement (Guideline 71-1) is fulfilled (MRID 137189, 136998, 160000). 

Table F-1 Summary of avian acute oral toxicity data for endosulfan 

Species % ai LD50 

(mg/kg) 

Toxicity 

Category 

MRID No./ 

Author Year 

Study 

Classification 

Northern bobwhite quail 

(Colinus virginianus) 97.2 42 highly toxic 

137189/ 

Roberts and 

Phillips 1983 

acceptable 

Mallard duck 

(Anas platyrhynchos) 97.2 28 highly toxic 

136998/ 

Roberts and 

Phillips 1983 

acceptable 

Mallard duck 

(Anas platyrhynchos) 96 33 highly toxic 

160000/ 

Hudson et al. 

1984 

acceptable 

Mallard duck 

(Anas platyrhynchos) 96 31.2 highly toxic 

160000/ 

Hudson et al. 

1984 

acceptable 

Mallard duck 

(Anas platyrhynchos) 96 45 highly toxic 

160000/ 

Hudson et al. 

1984 

acceptable 

Ring-necked pheasant 

(Phasianus colchicus) 96 <160 not categorized 160000/ 

Hudson et al. acceptable 

F-1
LD50 Toxicity MRID No./ Study Species % ai (mg/kg) Category Author Year Classification 

1984 

Ring-necked pheasant 

(Phasianus colchicus) 96 190 moderately toxic 

160000/ 

Hudson et al. 

1984 

acceptable 

Ring-necked pheasant 

(Phasianus colchicus) 96 >320 not categorized 

160000/ 

Hudson et al. 

1984 

acceptable 

Two subacute dietary studies using the TGAI are required to establish the toxicity of 

endosulfan to birds. The preferred test species are mallard duck and bobwhite quail. 

Subacute, dietary toxicity data are available for four species of birds (bobwhite quail, 

mallard duck, ring-necked pheasant, and Japanese quail) that range from 805 to 1,275 

mg/kg-diet (Table F-2) Since the LC50 for quail, i.e., 805 ppm, falls in the range of 501 

to 1,000 ppm, endosulfan is categorized as moderately toxic to avian species on a 

subacute dietary basis. The avian subacute dietary toxicity testing requirement (Guideline 

71-2) is fulfilled (MRID 22923). 

Table F-2. Summary of avian subacute dietary toxicity data on endosulfan 

Species % ai 5-Day LC50 

(ppm)a Toxicity 

Category 

MRID No./ 

Author Year 

Study 

Classification 

Northern bobwhite quail 

(Colinus virginianus) 96 805 moderately toxic 

22923/ 

Hill et al. 

1975 

acceptable 

Mallard duck 

(Anas platyrhynchos) 96 1,053 slightly toxic 

22923/ 

Hill et al. 

1975 

acceptable 

Ring-necked pheasant 

(Phasianus colchicus) 96 1,275 slightly toxic 

22923/ 

Hill et al. 

1975 

acceptable 

Japanese quail 

(Coturnix japonica) 96 1025 slightly toxic 

22923/ 

Hill et al. 

1975 

supplemental 

a

Test organisms observed an additional three days while on untreated diet. 

Results from registrant-submitted studies on the toxicity of endosulfan sulfate to avian 

species are summarized in (Table F-3). Based on the comparison of parent endosulfan 

and sulfate degradate acute dietary toxicity with bobwhite quail and mallard duck, 

endosulfan sulfate appears about equal in toxicity to waterfowl (mallard) and at least a 

factor of 4 less toxic to game birds (quail). 

F-2
Table F-3. Comparison of acute toxicity of endosulfan and endosulfan sulfate to 

birds. 

Acute Oral Toxicity Acute Dietary Toxicity 

Endosulfan Endosulfan Sulfate Endosulfan Endosulfan Sulfate 

Species 

LD50 

(ppm) 

Toxicity 

Category 

(MRID) 

LD50 

(ppm) 

Toxicity 

Category 

(MRID) 

5-day 

LC50

(ppm) 

Toxicity 

Category 

(MRID) 

5-day 

LC50

(ppm) 

Toxicity 

Category 

(MRID) 

Northern bobwhite 

quail 

(Colinus 

virginianu)s

-- -- 44 

highly toxic

46430501/ 

Stoughton 

2004 

805 

moderately 

toxic 

22923 

>3528 

46430502a/

Sabbert 

2004

Mallard duck 

(Anas 

platyrhynchos)

28 

highly 

toxic 

136998 

--- -- 1053 

slightly 

toxic 

22923 

1642 

46382601/ 

Christ & 

Larn 2004 

 aStudy classified as supplemental. 

Additional Open Literature (ECOTOX) Data for Avian Acute Oral Toxicity

There were no additional acceptable open literature studies that were lower than the bird 

acute toxicity reference value of 28 mg/kg. 

II. Chronic Exposure Studies With Birds 

Registrant Submitted Data for Avian Reproductive Toxicity 

Avian reproduction studies using the TGAI are required for endosulfan because the 

following conditions are met: (1) birds may be subject to repeated or continuous exposure 

to the pesticide, especially preceding or during the breeding season, (2) the pesticide is 

stable in the environment to the extent that potentially toxic amounts may persist in 

animal feed, (3) the pesticide is stored or accumulated in plant or animal tissues, and/or, 

(4) information derived from mammalian reproduction studies indicates reproduction in 

terrestrial vertebrates may be adversely affected by the anticipated use of the product. 

The preferred test species are mallard duck and bobwhite quail. In chronic toxicity 

studies of technical grade endosulfan involving mallard ducks (MRID 40335001), at a 

dietary concentration of 64 ppm (the LOAEC) there were treatment related effects upon 

reproductive parameters (reduction in the number of eggs laid and hatchability), adult 

body weight and feed consumption (Table F-4). The avian NOAEC is determined from 

this study is 30 ppm in the diet. The guideline (71-4) is fulfilled (40335001, 40335002, 

146843). 

F-3
Table F-4. Summary of avian reproductive toxicity studies using technical grade 

endosulfan. 

Species/ Study 

Duration % ai NOEC/LOEC (ppm) 

LOEC 

Endpoints 

MRID No. 

Author/Year 

Study 

Classification 

Northern bobwhite quail 

(Colinus virginianus)/ 

27 weeks 

96 NOEC = 64 

LOEC = 134 

Increase in # of 

cracked eggs 

40335002/ 

Beavers et al. 

1987a 

acceptable 

Mallard duck 

(Anas platyrhynchos)/ 

22 weeks 

96 NOEC = 30

LOEC = 64 

Eggs laid, 

eggs set, 

embryo 

viability 

40335001/ 

Beavers et al. 

1987b 

acceptable 

Mallard duck 

(Anas platyrhynchos) tech NOEC <30 

146843/ 

Roberts et al. 

1985 

supplemental 

Additional Open Literature (ECOTOX) Data for Avian Acute Oral Toxicity

There were no additional acceptable open literature studies that were lower than the bird 

chronic toxicity reference value of 30 ppm endosulfan in the diet. 

III. Acute and Chronic Exposure Studies With Mammals 

Submitted Data for Mammals 

Wild mammal testing is required on a case-by-case basis, depending on the results of 

lower tier laboratory mammalian studies, intended use pattern and pertinent 

environmental fate characteristics. In most cases, rat or mouse toxicity values obtained 

from the Agency's Health Effects Division (HED) substitute for wild mammal testing. 

The acute oral LD50 values for the laboratory rat (Rattus norvegicus) were 10 and 40 

mg/kg for females and males, respectively (MRID 38307; Table F-5). Since acute 

toxicity estimates fall in the range of 10 to 50 mg/kg, endosulfan is classified as highly 

toxic on an acute exposure basis. A two-generation rate reproduction study measured the 

NOAEC and LOAEL as 15 and 75 ppm, respectively, with decreased body weight as the 

most sensitive endpoint (MRID 148264). 

Table F-5. Summary of acute and chronic mammalian toxicity data based on acute oral 

toxicity study with rats, Ratus norvegicus, and a 2-generation reproduction study in rats 

using endosulfan.

Species Test Type Toxicity 

Value 

Affected 

Endpoints MRID No. 

laboratory rat 

(Rattus norvegicus) Acute oral 

LD50

10 mg/kg 

(female) 

40 mg/kg 

(male) mortality 38307 

F-4
Species Test Type Toxicity Affected 

Value Endpoints MRID No. 

laboratory rat 

2-generation rat 

reproduction 

study 

NOAEC = 15 

ppm 

LOAEL = 75 

ppm 

decreased 

pup body 

weight 

148264 

Endosulfan was evaluated for acute oral toxicity in male and female rats according to the 

criteria of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, 16 CFR, part 1500.3. Six groups of five 

male and eight groups of five female albino rats were fed test material administered 

orally. Males received dosage levels of 15.9, 25.1, 39.8, 63.1, and 100.0 mg/kg. Females 

received dosages levels of 3.98, 6.31, 10.0, 15.9, 25.1, 39.8, 63.1, and 100.0 mg/kg. Rats 

of all groups were monitored for mortality and signs of toxicosis immediately after 

dosing, at one and four hours post-dosing, and once daily thereafter for a total of 14 days. 

The acute oral LD50 was calculated to be 40.38 and 9.58 mg/kg of body weight for the 

male and female rats, respectively. Endosulfan is considered to be highly toxic to 

mammals. 

Chronic effects of endosulfan on reproductive performance and development of the rat 

was determined through continuously administered, dietary concentrations of 0 (control), 

3, 15, and 75 ppm. This study comprised two adult generations (F0 and F1B) with two 

mating phases in each. 

Among parent animals at 75 ppm there were no mortalities in either generation, no signs 

attributed to treatment, and no consistent effect on food or water comsumption. Weekly 

bodyweight gain of F0 generation females and of F1B males and females was marginally 

lower than among control animals, but generally the differences were not statistically 

significant. At termination there was a clear tendency in both generations for slightly 

increased mean liver weight among males and females and for slightly increased kidney 

weight among males. However, in the absence of any treatment –related microscopic 

changes among tissues from F1B adults, the differences in liver and kidney weights were 

considered to represent a marginal effect of treatment. 

There was no adverse effect on mating performance, pregnancy rate, or the mean 

duration of gestation, in either generation. In both generations litter parameters at birth 

appeared essentially unaffected by treatment. However, through lactation to weaning 

there were consistently lower litter weight, and for both matings of the F0 generation 

differences from control values were statistically significant. This tendency occurred in 

the absence of a consistent underlying pattern of differences among values for pup weight 

or litter size and pup mortality, which generally appeared unaffected by treatment. The no 

observable effect level for this endpoint was 15 ppm, with a lowest observable effect 

concentration of 75 ppm. 

Among offspring there was no clear effect on incidences of macroscopic changes at 

autopsy and no consistent effect on organ weights. Microscopic examination of tissues 

from F2B weanlings showed no changes considered attributable to treatment. 

F-5
Additional Open Literature (ECOTOX) Data for Mammals

There were not additional acceptable open literature studies that reported acute oral LC50

values less than that presented above. There also were no data comparable to that from 

the reproductive study above. However, there were two studies listed in the ECOTOX 

database that provide some supplemental LC50 data for both mice (Mus musculus) and 

rats (Rattus norvegicus). In the first study, Chugh et al. (1991—ECOTOX reference # 

93211) injected Swiss albino mice intraperitoneally with various doses of a commercial 

end-use product of endosulfan (35% EC). The 24-h LD50 was 4.9 mg/kg. Ten animals 

were used per dose; however, the number of treatments and the control mortality were 

not reported. The second study (Gupta 1976—ECOTOX reference #103467) also 

exposed animals via intraperitoneal injection of endosulfan, but the source of the 

endosulfan was not given. The author only used four animals per treatment and only four 

dose levels. Both mice (Mus musculus) and rats (Rattus norvegicus) were used, and 

animals were observed for 7 days after injection. For both species endosulfan was more 

toxic with alcohol as the vehicle then with 10% alcohol in ground nut oil (Table F-6). As 

with the submitted data above, female rats were more sensitive than males; however with 

mice there was no gender difference in sensitivity to endosulfan. 

F-6
Table F-6. Summary of results for rats and mice from Gupta 1976—ECOTOX 

#103467. 

Species Sex Vehicle LD50 (mg/kg) 

Rat F alcohol 22.1 

M alcohol 46.7 

F 10% alcohol in ground 

nut oil 48.6 

M 10% alcohol in ground 

nut oil 89.4 

Mouse F alcohol 7.5 

M alcohol 6.9 

F 10% alcohol in ground 

nut oil 13.5 

M 10% alcohol in ground 

nut oil 12.6 

Although there were no studies from the open literature comparable to the two-generation 

rat study listed in the last section, there were several reports in the ECOTOX database 

that evaluated sub-lethal effects. A 24 month dietary exposure of rats (Rattus norvegicus) 

and mice (Mus musculus) examined effects on survival, growth and carcinogenic 

potential (Hack et al. 1995—ECOTOX reference #103384). Effects on reproduction were 

not examined. The authors also concluded, based on a variety of organs and tumor types, 

that endosulfan has no carcinogenic potential in rats or mice. Rats were fed diets 

containing endosulfan (96.7% purity) at 0, 3, 7.5, 15, or 75 ppm. There were 50 rats per 

treatment group, and there was no effect on survival of either males or females due to 

endosulfan treatment. However, males fed the highest concentration were only 83% of 

the body weight of control males, and females from this treatment group were 82% of the 

final body weight of control females. The authors concluded that the no-effect-level-for 

rats was 15 ppm based on weight. Mice were fed diets containing endosulfan at 0, 2, 6 or 

18 ppm. There were 60 mice per treatment group, and there was no statistical significant 

effect on growth in mice with any endosulfan treatment. Survival in females was 

significantly less than the controls at the highest treatment level (45% survival in controls 

vs. 28% at 18 ppm). There was no statistically significant effect on survival in males, but 

their survival rate was less at the highest treatment levela (55% survival in controls vs. 

42% survival at 18 ppm). The authors concluded that the no-effect-level-for rats was 15 

ppm based on weight, and the NOEL for mice was 6 ppm, based on survival. 

Two other studies exposed rats via oral intubation to various concentrations of technical 

grade endosulfan using either peanut oil (Sinha et al. 1995—ECOTOX reference # 

103592) or olive oil (Singh et al., 2007—ECOTOX reference # 103238). The first study 

F-7
used three-month-old Druckrey rats (Rattus norvegicus) and exposed four groups of 15 

male rats to endosulfan (95.3% purity) at 0, 2.5, 5.0 and 10 mg/kg body weight. Doses 

were given 5 days a week for a total period of 70 days. Mean sperm count at the end of 

the 70 days was significantly reduced relative to the controls with all three treatments 

(78, 56, and 53% of the controls at 2.5, 5.0 and 10 mg/kg, respectively). Sperms counts 

were based on five animals from each group. The other animals were used to evaluate the 

concentrations of various enzymes associated with male reproduction. The authors 

concluded that endosulfan impairs testicular function by altering the enzyme activities 

responsible for spermatogenesis. 

The second oral intubation study (ECOTOX # 103238) exposed sexually mature female 

Wistar rats (ca. 180 g) to endosulfan (>99.98% purity) at the rate of 1 mg/kg body 

weight. Treatments were given to pregnant rats from day 6 to day 20 of pregnancy. There 

were 10 females per treatment. The endosulfan treated animals weighed significantly less 

than the controls, as well as had a significant decrease in the percentage of live fetuses. In 

addition, the weight of the fetuses was less in the endosulfan treatment. Finally, there was 

about a 10% rate of fetal abnormalities in the endosulfan treatment compared to no 

abnormalities observed in the controls. 

IV. Terrestrial-phase Amphibians and Reptiles 

There were no acceptable studies available for the effect of endosulfan on terrestrialphase amphibians or reptiles. One study listed in ECOTOX used juvenile leopard frogs 

(Christin, et al. 2003—ECOTOX reference # 70218); however the frogs were exposed to 

endosulfan as part of a mixture of six different pesticides. There was also a study in the 

database using eggs of the broad-snouted caiman (Caiman latirostris). Eggs were treated 

with a single dose of 1.5, 150 or 1500 μg endosulfan/egg (technical grade 96.3% purity). 

There was no effect on sex ratio due to any treatment. In addition, there was only a 

difference of a few percent relative to controls for changes in egg weight between 

treatment and hatch (40 to 49 days) or in the weight of hatchlings expressed as a percent 

of initial egg weight (Beldomenico, et al. 2007—ECOTOX reference # 103221). 

V. Beneficial Insects--Acute Exposure Studies on Honey Bees 

Submitted Data for Beneficial Insects

A honey bee acute contact study using the TGAI is required for endosulfan because its 

use will result in honey bee exposure. The acute contact LD50, using the honey bee Apis 

mellifera is a single-dose laboratory study designed to estimate the quantity of toxicant 

required to cause 50% mortality in a test population of bees. The TGAI is administered 

by one of two methods: whole body exposure to technical grade in a non-toxic dust 

diluent; or topical exposure to technical grade via micro-applicator. The median lethal 

dose (LD50) is expressed in micrograms of active ingredient per bee. Results of these tests 

are tabulated below (Table F-6). The acute contact toxicity study requirement (Guideline 

141-1) is fulfilled. Toxicity category descriptions for honey bee acute contact toxicity are 

the following: 

If the LD50 is less than 2 ug a.i./bee, then the test substance is highly toxic. 

F-8
If the LD50 is between 2 and 11 ug a.i./bee, then the test substance is moderately toxic.

If the LC50 is 11 ug a.i./bee or greater, then the test substance is practically non-toxic. 

The acute oral LC50 for the honey bee Apis melliferai is a single-dose laboratory study 

designed to estimate the quantity of toxicant required to cause 50% mortality in a test 

population of bees. The TGAI is administered by feeding bees the technical pesticide in a 

sugar water (and possibly solvent) solution using a feeding tube inserted into a cage. The 

LD50 is expressed in micrograms of active ingredient per bee. Results of this test also are 

tabulated in Table F-6. The Office of Pesticides Programs (OPP) does not have a 

categorization scheme for acute oral toxicity to honey bees. However, the following 

scheme based on ICBB (1985) categorization is provided for informational purposes: 

If the LD50 is less than 1.0 ug a.i./bee, then the test substance is highly toxic.

If the LD50 is between 1.0 and 10 uga.i./bee, then the substance is moderately toxic.

If the LD50is between 10 and 100 ug a.i./bee, then the substance is slightly toxic.

If the LD50 is greater than 100 ug a.i./bee, then the test substance is virtually non-toxic. 

A honey bee foliar residue toxicity study is required on an end-use produce for any 

pesticide intended for outdoor application when the proposed use pattern indicates that 

honey bees may be exposed to the pesticide and when the formulation contains one or 

more active ingredients having an acute contact honey bee LD50 which falls in the 

moderately toxic or highly toxic range. Usually, pesticides toxic to honey bees require 

precautionary labeling specific to bees on all end-use formulations and registrants are 

required to submit data in accordance with Guideline 141-2 (Honey Bee Toxicity 

Residues on Foliage). The purpose of this guideline study is to develop data on the 

residual toxicity to honey bees. Bee mortality determinations are made from bees 

exposed to treated foliage harvested at various time periods after treatment. The avaiable 

study on foliar residue toxicity for endosulfan are listed in Table F-6. 

Table F-6. Summary of foliage reside toxicity studies for honey bees (Apis mellifera) 

using endosulfan. 

Type of 

Study 

% a.i. LD/ LC50 (μg 

a.i./bee)/duration 

Category Reference Study 

Classification 

Acute 

contact 

tech 7.1 

24 hr 

moderately 

toxic 

MRID 

05004151/ 

Stevenson 1968 

acceptable 

Acute 

contact 

tech 4.5 moderately 

toxic 

MRID 

0001999/Atkins 

and Anderson 

1967 

acceptable 

Acute oral tech 6.9 

24 hr 

moderately 

toxic 

MRID 

05004151/ 

Stevenson 1968 

acceptable 

F-9
Type of % a.i. LD/ LC50 (μg Category Reference Study 

Study a.i./bee)/duration Classification 

Foliar 

residue 

35 EC > 0.77 lb/a (0% 

mortality at this rate 

after 24 hr) 

-- MRID 

05008936/ 

Cinch 1967 

supplemental 

Foliar 

residue 

17.5 > 1.10 lb/a (15 bees 

dead after 5 days out 

of ca. 4500 bees 

exposed)a

-- MRID 

05012881/ 

Gorecki 1973 

supplemental 

a

Original value listed as 7.00 kg/ha of commercial preparation. 

Additional Open Literature (ECOTOX) Data for Honey Bees 

There was one additional study from the open literature that presented data on the acute 

contact toxicity of endosulfan to honey bees, Apis mellifera (Kumar and Kumar 1994—

ECOTOX reference # 91623).These authors present the LD50s for 14 tests with technical 

grade endosulfan using a micro-applicator. The LC50s ranged from 4.43 to 9.50 ug 

a.i./bee with a geometric mean of 5.83 ug a.i./bee. 

VI. Additional Open Literature Information on Non-Target Terrestrial 

Invertebrates 

The ECOTOX database was examined for toxicity data using non-target species with 

endpoints expressed in terms similar to those for the standard test with honey bees. The 

stingless bee and Indian honey bee (Table F-7) were more sensitive than the standard 

honey bee in comparable tests (Macieira and Hebling-Beraldo 1989—ECOTOX 

reference #51755; Kumar and Kumar 1994—ECOTOX reference # 91623). However, 

both of these bees are smaller than the traditional honey bee. Three different foliar 

residue studies using three different species of parasitic wasps also are listed in Table F7. Significant mortality occurred at the reported application rates (0.50 to 1.50 lb/a). 

Several studies listed in the ECOTOX database used earthworms as the test organism. 

Mosleh et al (2003—ECOTOX reference # 86741; note this is the same data that the 

authors also report in Mosleh et al. 2002—ECOTOX reference #87129) report LC50s 

using a commercial end-use product mixed with natural soil for the earthworm Lumbricus 

terrestris. The LC50s declined as the duration of exposure increased. 

F-10
Table F-7. Additional Open Literature Information on Non-Target Terrestrial 

Invertebrates.

Species 

Type of 

Study/Dur

ation 

% a.i. Effect Reference Study 

Classification 

Stingless bee 

(Trigona 

spinipes) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

tech LC50 = 0.2097 ug 

a.i./beea

Macieira and 

HeblingBeraldo 

1989/ECOTOX 

51755 

supplemental 

Indian Honey 

Bee (Apis 

cerana indica) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

tech LD50 = 1.60 ug 

a.i./bee 

Kumar and 

Kumar 1994/ 

ECOTOX 

91623 

supplemental 

Indian Honey 

Bee (Apis 

cerana indica) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

tech LD50 = 1.15 ug 

a.i./bee 

Kumar and 

Kumar 1994/ 

ECOTOX 

91623 

supplemental 

Indian Honey 

Bee (Apis 

cerana indica) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

tech LD50 = 1.40 ug 

a.i./bee 

Kumar and 

Kumar 1994/ 

ECOTOX 

91623 

supplemental 

Indian Honey 

Bee (Apis 

cerana indica) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

tech LD50 = 1.34 ug 

a.i./bee 

Kumar and 

Kumar 1994/ 

ECOTOX 

91623 

supplemental 

Indian Honey 

Bee (Apis 

cerana indica) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

tech LD50 = 1.23 ug 

a.i./bee 

Kumar and 

Kumar 1994/ 

ECOTOX 

91623 

supplemental 

Indian Honey 

Bee (Apis 

cerana indica) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

tech LD50 = 1.58 ug 

a.i./bee 

Kumar and 

Kumar 1994/ 

ECOTOX 

91623 

supplemental 

Indian Honey 

Bee (Apis 

cerana indica) 

Acute 

contact 

24 hr 

35% EC LC50 = 0.513 ug 

a.i./beea

Lingappa et al. 

1985/ECOTOX 

94337 

supplemental 

Parasitic wasp 

(Cotesia 

marginiventris) 

Foliar 

residue 

24 hr 

Thiodan (% 

not given) 

100% mortality at 

0.93 lb/ab

Tillman and 

Scott 1997/ 

ECOTOX 

64166 

supplemental 

Parasitic wasp 

(Catolaccus 

grandis) 

Foliar 

residue 

72 hr 

3 EC (% not 

given) 

females: 37.5 % 

mortality/ 

males: 83.3% 

mortality after at 

1.5 lb/ab

Elzen et al. 

2000/ 

ECOTOX 

58583 

supplemental 

F-11
Type of Study Species Study/Dur % a.i. Effect Reference Classification ation 

Parasitic wasp 

(Trichogramma 

pretiosum) 

Foliar 

residue 

24 hr 

not given 

90% mortality after 

aging 1 da; 30% 

mortality after aging 3 

da; no effect on 

mortality after aging 7 

da of 0.50 lb/ab

Jacobs et al. 

1984/ 

ECOTOX 

37276 

supplemental 

Earthworm 

(Lumbricus 

terrestris0 

soil 

exposure 

2 da 

35% LC50 = 12.29 mg/kg 

Mosleh et al. 

2003/ 

ECOTOX 

86741 

supplemental 

Earthworm 

(Lumbricus 

terrestris0 

soil 

exposure 

7 da 

35% LC50 = 5.82 mg/kg 

Mosleh et al. 

2003/ 

ECOTOX 

86741 

supplemental 

Earthworm 

(Lumbricus 

terrestris0 

soil 

exposure 

15 da 

35% LC50 = 3.36 mg/kg 

Mosleh et al. 

2003/ 

ECOTOX 

86741 

supplemental 

a

Presumed to be active ingredient since table used endosulfan, but authors did not explicitly state. 

b

Originally expressed as kg/ha. 

VII. Terrestrial Plants 

No data have been submitted to the Agency to evaluate the effects of endosulfan on 

terrestrial plants because historically, terrestrial plant toxicity studies and associated risk 

analysis of plants were not required for registration of a pesticide unless it met specific 

use and pesticide classification criteria which would trigger potential concerns. In 

addition to the lack of registrant-submitted data, no studies demonstrating significant 

adverse effects of endosulfan to any terrestrial plant have been identified in the open 

literature. Although a number of studies involving terrestrial plants and endosulfan were 

identified in the open literature, none of these studies provide reliable estimates of 

toxicity that may be used in this risk assessment. Reasons that these studies were deemed 

unacceptable for use were primarily because these studies were associated with efficacy 

studies in which observations were confounded by the presence of an insect pest 

complex. As such, plants in these tests generally did not demonstrate any adverse effects 

at any test levels, but did not test up to the maximum allowable rate. For a comprehensive 

consideration of all potential effects data and additional information for terrestrial plants 

please refer to the detailed spreadsheet of the available ECOTOX open literature data that 

can be found in Appendix D. 

VIII. References 

The references that refer to an ECOTOX number can be found in the reference list for 

Appendix D. The references listed below are for the data submitted to the Agency. 

F-12
 MRID Terrestrial Citation References 

Guideline 71-1. Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity 

102038 Hudson, R.; Tucker, R.; Haegele, M. (1972) Effect of age on sensitivity: Acute oral toxicity of 

14 pesticides to mallard ducks of several ages. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 

(22):556- 561. (Also In unpublished submission received Oct 26, 1977 under 1016-69; 

submitted by Union Carbide Corp., Arlington, VA; CDL:096397-E) 

136997 Roberts, N.; Phillips, C. (1983) The Acute Oral Toxicity (LD50) of Endosulfan--Technical 

(Code: HOE 002671 OI ZD97 0003) to the Bobwhite Quail: HST 224/83566. (Unpublished 

study received Dec 27, 1983 under 8340-13; prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre, Eng., 

submitted by American Hoeschst Corp., Somerville, NJ; CDL: 252043-E) 

136998 Roberts, N.; Phillips, C. (1983) The Acute Oral Toxicity (LD50) of Endosulfan--Technical 

(Code: HOE 002671 OI ZD97 0003) to the Mallard Duck: HST 226/83493. (Unpublished 

study received Dec 27, 1983 under 8340-13; prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre, Eng., 

submitted by American Hoeschst Corp., Somerville, NJ; CDL: 252043-F) 

137189 Roberts, N.; Phillips, C. (1983) The Acute Oral Toxicity (LD50) of Endosulfan Technical 

(Code: Hoe 002671 OI ZD97 0003) to the Bobwhite Quail: HST 224/83566; A27035. 

(Unpublished study received Jan 16, 1984 under 11678-5; prepared by Huntingdon Research 

Centre, Eng., submitted by Makhteshim Beer Sheva Chemical Works, Ltd., New York, NY; 

CDL:252229-A) 

160000 Hudson, R.; Tucker, R.; Haegele, M. (1984) Handbook of toxicity of pesticides to wildlife: 

Second edition. US Fish and Wildlife Service: Resource Publication 153. 91 p. 

46430501 Stoughton, T. (2004) Endosulfan Sulfate Technical: An Acute Dietary LD50 with Northern 

Bobwhite. Project Number: ES/711701, 200618. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corp. 

36 p. 

Guideline 71-2. Avian Dietary Toxicity

101251 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (1962) Toxicity: 

Phosphamidon. (Unpublished study; CDL: 090672-U) 

22923 Hill, E.F.; Heath, R.G.; Spann, J.W.; et al. (1975) Lethal Dietary Toxicities of Environmental 

Pollutants to Birds: Special Scientific Report--Wildlife No. 191. (U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center; unpublished report) 

46382601 Christ, M.; Larn, C. (2004) Technical Endosulfan-Sulfate (A Metabolite of Endosulfan): A 

Subacute Dietary LC50 with Mallards. Project Number: ES720801, 201058, B004669. 

Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corp. 29 p. 

46430502 Sabbert, T. (2004) Endosulfan Sulfate Technical: A Subactute Dietary LC50 with Northwhite 

Bobwhite. Project Number: ES/721701, 200619. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer 

Cropscience LP. 36 p. 

Guideline 71-4. Avian Reproduction 

146843 Roberts, N.; Phillips, C.; Dawe, I.; et al. (1985) The Effects of Dietary Inclusion of 

Endosulfan--Technical on Reproduction in the Mallard Duck. HRC Report No. HST 

228b/841012. Unpublished study prepared by Huntington Research Centre plc. 211 p. 

148992 Roberts, N.; Phillips, C.; Almond, R.; et al. (1984) The Effects of Dietary Inclusion of 

Endosulfan--Technical (Code: Hoe 002671 OI ZD97 0003) on Reproduction in the Bobwhite 

Quail: HRC Report No. HST 227/84362. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre plc. 285 p. 

155199 Leist; Ebert (1985) Comments on Endosulfan - EPA Ecological Effects Branch Review of 

F-13
Avian Toxicology. Unpublished study prepared by Hoechst Aktiengesellschaft. 23 p. 

40335001 Beavers, J.; Frank, P.; Jaber, M. (1987) Endosulfan Technical Sub- stance (Code: HOE 

002671 OI ZD95 0005): A One-generation Reproduction Study with the Mallard (Anas 

platyrhynchos): Lab Project No. 125-137. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 146 p. 

40335002 Beavers, J.; Frank, P.; Jaber, M. (1987) Endosulfan Technical Sub- stance (Code: HOE 

002671 OI ZD95 0005): A One-generation Reproduction Study with the Bobwhite (Colinus 

virginianus): Lab Project No. 125-134. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International 

Ltd. 144 p. 

Guideline 81-1. Acute oral toxicity in rats 

38307 Reno, F.E. (1975) Final Report: Acute Oral Toxicity Study in Rats: Project No. 915-108. 

(Unpublished study received Jul 28, 1980 under 2749-487; prepared by Hazleton 

Laboratories America, Inc., submitted by Aceto Chemical Co., Inc., Flushing, N.Y.; CDL: 

243082-A) 

Guideline 83-4. Two-generation reproduction in the rat 

148264 Edwards, J.; Reid, Y.; Offer, J.; et al. (1984) Effect of Endosulfan--Technical on 

Reproductive Function of Multiple Generations of the Rat: Report No. HST 204/83768. 

Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre plc. 422 p. 

Guideline 141-1. Honey Bee Acute Contact Toxicity 

1999 Atkins, E.L.,Jr; Anderson, J.D. (1967). Toxicity of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals 

to honey bees: laboratory studies. (Unpublished study received Jan. 30, 1969 under 9G0802; 

prepared by Univ. of California-Riverside, Dept. of Entomology, submitted by Hercules, Inc., 

Agricultural Chemicals, Wilmington, Del.; CDI: 093111-D). 

Guideline 141-2. Honey Bee Toxicity of Residues on Foliage 

5004151 Stevenson, J.H. (1968) Laboratory studies on the acute contact and oral toxicities of 

insecticides to honeybees. Annals of Applied Biology 61 (3): 467-472. 

5008936 Clinch, P.G. (1967) The residual contact toxicity to honey bees of insecticides sprayed on 

white clover (Trifolium repens L) in the laboratory. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural 

Research 10(2): 289-300. 

5012881 Gorecki, K. (1973) Zatrucia Pszczoly Miodnej—Apis mellifica L. (Hym. Apidae) 

Insektycydami Stosowanymi W Kraju. [Harmful effects of insecticides used in Poland on the 

honey bee—Apis Mellifica L. (Hym. Apidae).] Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne. [Polish 

Journal of Entomology] 4(1):201-210. 

F-14