## Appendix F. Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data

This appendix is a summary of the toxici ty 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 referen ce 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 le ss 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 th e active ingredient (TGAI) is required to establish the toxicity of endosulfa n 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 fo r 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 LD 50 

### (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 or al 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-1LD50 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 pheas ant, and Japanese quail) that range from 805 to 1,275 mg/kg-diet (Table F-2) Since the LC 50 

### for quail, i.e., 805 ppm, fa lls 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 di etary toxicity testing requirement (Guideline 71-2) is fulfilled (MRID 22923).

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

Species % ai 5-Day LC 50 (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 th e toxicity of endosulfan sulfate to avian species are summarized in (T able F-3). Based on the comp arison of parent endosulfan and sulfate degradate acute dietary toxici ty with bobwhite quail and mallard duck, endosulfan sulfate appears about equal in toxicity to waterf owl (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 LC 50 (ppm) Toxicity Category (MRID) 5-day LC 50 (ppm) Toxicity Category (MRID)

Northern bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianu)s -- -- 44 highly toxic 46430501/ Stoughton

2004 805 moderately toxic 22923 >3528 46430502 a / Sabbert

2004

Mallard duck ( Anas platyrhynchos) 28 highly toxic 136998 --- -- 1053 slightly toxic 22923 1642 46382601/ Christ & Larn 2004

a Study classified as supplemental.



### Additional Open Literature (ECOTOX) Data for Avian Acute Oral Toxicity There were no additional acceptabl e 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 repe ated or continuous exposure to the pesticide, especially preceding or dur ing the breeding season, (2) the pesticide is stable in the environment to the extent th at 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 re production studies indi cates reproduction in terrestrial vertebrates may be adversely aff ected 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 pp m (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 acceptabl e 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, respective ly (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-gene ration rate reproduction study measured the NOAEC and LOAEL as 15 and 75 ppm, respectiv ely, with decreased body weight as the most sensitive endpoint (MRID 148264). Table F-5. Summary of acute and chronic ma mmalian 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 LD 50 10 mg/kg (female) 40 mg/kg

(male) mortality 38307



### F-4Species 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 on ce daily thereafter for a total of 14 days. The acute oral LD 50 

### was calculated to be 40.38 and 9.58 mg/kg of body weight for the male and female rats, respectively. Endosulfa n is considered to be highly toxic to mammals. Chronic effects of endosulfan on reproductive performance and development of the rat was determined through continuously administer ed, dietary concentrations of 0 (control), 3, 15, and 75 ppm. This study comprised two ad ult 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 genera lly 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 abse nce of any treatment –related microscopic changes among tissues from F1B adults, the diffe rences in liver and kidney weights were considered to represent a marginal effect of treatment. There was no adverse effect on mating perf ormance, 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 statisti cally significant. This tendency occurred in the absence of a consistent underlying pattern of differen ces among values for pup weight or litter size and pup mortality, which genera lly appeared unaffected by treatment. The no observable effect level for this endpoint wa s 15 ppm, with a lowest observable effect concentration of 75 ppm. Among offspring there was no cl ear effect on incidences of macroscopic changes at autopsy and no consistent effect on organ we ights. Microscopic ex amination of tissues from F2B weanlings showed no changes c onsidered attributable to treatment.

F-5

### Additional Open Literature (ECOTOX) Data for Mammals There were not additional acceptable open litera ture studies that reported acute oral LC 50 

### values less than that presented above. There al so were no data comparable to that from the reproductive study above. However, there were two studies lis ted in the ECOTOX database that provide some supplemental LC 50 

### 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 intraperitoneal ly 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 (Gupt a 1976—ECOTOX reference #103467) also exposed animals via intraperitoneal inject ion 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 inj ection. For both species endosulfan was more toxic with alcohol as the vehi cle 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 li terature comparable to the two-generation rat study listed in the last section, there we re 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. 19 95—ECOTOX reference #103384). E ffects on reproduction were not examined. The authors also concluded, base d 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 surv ival of either males or females due to endosulfan treatment. However, males fed th e highest concentrati on 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 aut hors concluded that th e no-effect-level-for rats was 15 ppm based on weight. Mice were fe d diets containing endos ulfan at 0, 2, 6 or 18 ppm. There were 60 mice per treatment gr oup, and there was no stat istical significant effect on growth in mice with any endosul fan treatment. Survival in females was significantly less than the controls at the highest treatment leve l (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 conclude d 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 o il (Sinha et al. 1995 —ECOTOX reference # 103592) or olive oil (Singh et al., 2007—ECO TOX 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 contro ls at 2.5, 5.0 and 10 mg/kg, re spectively). 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 impa irs testicular function by a ltering the enzyme activities responsible for spermatogenesis.
The second oral intubation study (ECOTOX # 103238) exposed sexuall y 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 treatme nt. 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 fo r the effect of endosulfan on terrestrialphase amphibians or reptiles. One study liste d in ECOTOX used juve nile leopard frogs (Christin, et al. 2003—ECOTOX reference # 70218); however the frogs were exposed to endosulfan as part of a mixtur e 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 μ g endosulfan/egg (techni cal 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 c ontrols 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 LD 50 

### , using the honey bee Apis mellifera is a single-dose laborator y study designed to estimat e the quantity of toxicant required to cause 50% mortality in a test popu lation 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 (LD 50 

### ) is expressed in micrograms of active ingr edient 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 descriptio ns for honey bee acute contact toxicity are the following:

If the LD 50 

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

F-8

### If the LD 50 

### is between 2 and 11 ug a.i./bee, then the test substance is moderately toxic. If the LC 50 

### is 11 ug a.i./bee or greater, then the test substance is practically non-toxic.
The acute oral LC 50 

### for the honey bee Apis melliferai is a single-dose laboratory study designed to estimate the quantity of toxicant re quired to cause 50% mortality in a test population of bees. The TGAI is administered by feeding bees the tec hnical pesticide in a sugar water (and possibly solvent) solution using a f eeding tube inserted into a cage. The LD 50 

### is expressed in micrograms of active ingredie nt per bee. Results of this test also are tabulated in Table F-6. The Office of Pe sticides Programs (OPP) does not have a categorization scheme for acute oral toxic ity to honey bees. However, the following scheme based on ICBB (1985) categorization is provided for informational purposes:

If the LD 50 

### is less than 1.0 ug a.i./bee, then the test substance is highly toxic. If the LD 50 

### is between 1.0 and 10 uga.i./ bee, then the substance is moderately toxic. If the LD 50 

### is between 10 and 100 ug a.i./b ee, then the substance is slightly toxic. If the LD 50 

### 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 LD 50 

### which falls in the moderately toxic or highly t oxic 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 b ees. 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/ LC 50 (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-9LD/ LC 50 (μg Type of % a.i. 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 (E COTOX) Data for Honey Bees There was one additional study from the open li terature that presen ted data on the acute contact toxicity of endo sulfan to honey bees, Apis mellifera (Kumar and Kumar 1994— ECOTOX reference # 91623).The se authors present the LD 50 

### s for 14 tests with technical grade endosulfan using a micro-applicator. The LC 50 

### s 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 In formation on Non-Target Terrestrial Invertebrates
The ECOTOX database was examined for toxi city data using non-ta rget 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 sensitiv e than the standard honey bee in comparable tests (Mac ieira and Hebling-Beraldo 1989—ECOTOX reference #51755; Kumar and Kumar 1994—ECOTOX reference # 91623). However, both of these bees are smaller than the tr aditional honey bee. Three different foliar residue studies using three diffe rent species of parasitic wasp s also are listed in Table F7. Significant mortality occurred at the repor ted application rates (0.50 to 1.50 lb/a).
Several studies listed in the ECOTOX databa se 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 LC 50 

### s using a commercial end-use product mixed with natural soil for the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris . The LC 50 

### s 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./bee a Macieira andHeblingBeraldo 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./bee a Lingappa et al. 1985/ECOTOX 94337 supplemental

Parasitic wasp ( Cotesia marginiventris ) Foliar residue

24 hr Thiodan (% not given) 100% mortality at 0.93 lb/a b 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/a b Elzen et al. 2000/ ECOTOX

58583 supplemental



### F-11Type of Study Species % a.i. Effect Reference Study/Dur 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/a b Jacobs et al. 1984/ ECOTOX

37276 supplemental

Earthworm ( Lumbricus terrestris 0 soil
exposure

2 da 35% LC50 = 12.29 mg/kg Mosleh et al. 2003/ ECOTOX

86741 supplemental

Earthworm ( Lumbricus terrestris 0 soil
exposure

7 da 35% LC50 = 5.82 mg/kg Mosleh et al. 2003/ ECOTOX

86741 supplemental

Earthworm ( Lumbricus terrestris 0 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, terrestr ial plant toxicity studies and associated risk analysis of plants were not required for re gistration of a pesticide unless it met specific use and pesticide classification criteria wh ich would trigger potential concerns. In addition to the lack of registrant-submitte d 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 involv ing 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 th ese studies were associated with efficacy studies in which observations were confounded by the pres ence of an insect pest complex. As such, plants in these tests gene rally 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 nu mber 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 Ci tation References Guideline 71-1. Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity

102038 Hudson, R.; Tucker, R.; Haeg ele, 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 submissi on 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 unde r 8340-13; prepared by Hunti ngdon 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 unde r 8340-13; prepared by Hunti ngdon 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 unde r 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 Serv ice: 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, Patuxe nt 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 Wild life Research Center; unpublished report)

46382601 Christ, M.; Larn, C. (2004) Technical En dosulfan-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 E ffects of Dietary Inclusion of Endosulfan--Technical (Code: Hoe 002671 OI ZD97 0003) on Reproduction in the Bobwhite Quail: HRC Report No. HST 227/84362. Unpub lished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre plc. 285 p.
155199 Leist; Ebert (1985) Comments on Endosulf an - EPA Ecological Eff ects Branch Review of



### F-13Avian Toxicology. Unpublished study prepared by Hoechst Aktiengesellschaft. 23 p.
40335001 Beavers, J.; Frank, P.; Jaber, M. (1987 ) Endosulfan Technical Su b- 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 Su b- 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 Acet o 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 st udies. (Unpublished study receive d 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 stud ies 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 t oxicity 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 eff ects 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