UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON D.C., 20460 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POllUTION PREVENTION 

PC Code: 113202 

DP Barcode: 0423285 

Date: March 3, 2015 

MEMORANDUM 

Subject: Registration Review: Problem Formulation for the Environmental Fate, Ecological Risk, 

Endangered Species, and Drinking Water Assessments for Famoxadone 

To: 

From: 

Christina Scheltema, Chemical Review Manager 

Avivah Jakob, l'eam Leader 

Neil Anderson, Acting Branch Chief 

Risk Management and Implementation Branch 3 

Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P) /'' 

Freeborn Jewett, M.S., Biologist 

Christopher M . Koper, M.S., Chemist 

Sujatha Sankula, Ph.D., Branch Chief 

Environmental Risk Branch I 

~ 

/ ' 

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) 

1 

~/J/z.. ol-sOJ f\tltec.tt b' 

3\ 3ll5 
2

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 4

Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments............................................................................................... 6

Environmental Fate and Transport............................................................................................................... 7

Receptors ................................................................................................................................................... 10

Exposure Pathways of Concern................................................................................................................... 18

Analysis Plan ............................................................................................................................................... 19

Endangered Species Assessments .............................................................................................................. 20

Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program .................................................................................................... 21

Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps ..................................................................................................... 21

References .................................................................................................................................................. 34

Appendix A: Famoxadone and its Degradates ........................................................................................... 35

Appendix B: Summary of Registered Uses ................................................................................................. 40

Appendix C: Previous Actions .................................................................................................................... 42

Appendix D: Inputs and Outputs from SIP ................................................................................................. 44

Appendix E: Inputs and Outputs from STIR ................................................................................................ 45

Appendix F: Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 46

Appendix G: Health Effect Division’s MARC Document ............................................................................. 54
3

1. Executive Summary:

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) has completed the problem formulation for the 

environmental fate, ecological risk, endangered species, and drinking water exposure assessments to be 

conducted as part of the Registration Review of the fungicide famoxadone. Famoxadone is an 

oxazolidinedione-class fungicide that is active against germination and mycelial growth of select fungi 

species. Functioning as the first stage of the risk assessment process for Registration Review, this 

problem formulation provides an overview of what is currently known about the environmental fate and 

ecological effects associated with famoxadone and its degradates. It also describes the preliminary 

ecological risk hypothesis and analysis plan for evaluating and characterizing drinking water exposure 

and risk to non-target species and the environment in support of the Registration Review of 

famoxadone. This document also recommends studies to be included in a data call-in (DCI) to address 

uncertainties surrounding the environmental fate and potential ecological effects of famoxadone.

a. Data Gaps

Data gaps in the environmental and ecological effects sections are identified and included in the data 

gaps section in Tables 7-10. Below is a brief summary: 

Fate data gaps for famoxadone (parent) are:

 OCSPP 835.4200: Anaerobic Soil Metabolism: 3 additional soils

 OCSPP 835.4300: Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism: 1 additional sediment-water system

 OCSPP 835.4400: Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism: 2 sediment-water systems

 OCSPP 860.1380: Storage Stability in soil and water

 OCSPP 850.7100: ECM/ILV: Method and independent validation in soil

Ecotoxicity data gaps for famoxadone (parent) are:

 Non Guideline Tier I: Honeybee acute adult oral toxicity

 Non Guideline Tier I: Honeybee adult chronic oral exposure

 Non Guideline Tier I: Honeybee larval acute oral exposure 

 Non Guideline Tier I: Honeybee larval chronic oral exposure 

 Non-Guideline Tier II: Semi-field testing for honeybees

 Guideline 850.3040: Field testing for pollinators

 Guideline 850.2100: Avian acute oral toxicity- passerine species

 Non-Guideline: Whole sediment chronic toxicity test for freshwater invertebrates, using

Chironomus dilutes, and freshwater amphipod Hyalella Azteca

 Non-Guideline: Whole sediment chronic toxicity test for estuarine/marine invertebrates, using

estuarine/marine amphipod Leptocheirus plumulosus

Ecotoxicity data gaps for famoxadone degradates are: 

 Studies were submitted by the Registrant upon request that assess the toxicity of the major 

degradates of famoxadone to Daphnia magna. These studies will be evaluated by the Agency, 

and if they are found not to be scientifically sound, they will be considered data gaps. Toxicity 

studies for three of the degradates were not included in this group of studies. Details of these 

studies are available in Table 10. 

 Guideline 850.1010: 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-KZ007 to Daphnia magna

 Guideline 850.1010: 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-MN467 to Daphnia magna

 Guideline 850.1010: 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-MN968 to Daphnia magna
4

b. Uncertainties

 There is limited toxicity data available for the 9 degradates of famoxadone, although 

preliminary, unreviewed studies on Daphnia magna indicate that these degradates are 

considerably less toxic than the parent, famoxadone. 

 The label currently lists the number of applications for spinach in terms of cropping cycles and 

there may be more than one cropping cycle per season for these crops depending on the 

geographic region. In the absence of this information, a maximum of 8 annual applications will 

be assumed. 

2. Introduction

The purpose of this problem formulation is to provide an understanding of what is known about the 

environmental fate and ecological effects of famoxadone considering its currently registered uses. This 

document will provide a plan for analyzing data relevant to famoxadone and for conducting ecological 

risk, endangered species, and drinking water exposure assessments for its registered uses. This problem 

formulation is intended to identify data gaps, uncertainties, and potential assumptions used to address 

those uncertainties relative to characterizing the ecological risk associated with the registered uses of 

famoxadone. In addition, the Agency has developed the “Endangered Species Protection Program'' to 

identify pesticides which may cause adverse impacts on endangered and threatened species, and to 

implement mitigation measures that will eliminate the adverse impacts.

Famoxadone (CAS 131807-57-3; PC Code 113202) is currently registered for agricultural uses (USEPA 

2014a) as a mixture with cymoxanil (PC code 129106), under the commercial name, Tanos. Tanos is 

labeled for aerial, ground spray, and chemigation at a maximum annual rate of 1.31 lbs famoxadone/A, 

and a maximum of 8 annual applications. The labeled uses and rates currently listed for Tanos are 

available in Appendix C. 

EFED evaluated the most recent ecological risk assessments for famoxadone in association with the 

updated toxicity, exposure, and usage information to determine if sufficient data are available and if 

further updates are needed to support registration review. Recent risk assessments include a 2008 

assessment for the use of famoxadone on leafy greens, bulb vegetables, cilantro, cranberries, leafy 

Petioles (D349252); as well as a 2006 assessment on grapes, hops, and caneberries (D331970). In 

addition, EFED considered the latest Agency science policies and risk assessment methodologies. The 

structure of famoxadone, as well as the chemical names and structures of major and minor degradates

can be found in the chemical identity table located in Appendix A.

3. Use Characterization

a. Mode of Action

Famoxadone is a non-systemic, broad-spectrum fungicide that belongs to the class of chemicals known 

as oxazolidinediones. Following famoxadone application, sporangial differentiation and release of 

zoospores is inhibited. Upon higher application rates, mycelial growth and germination of sporangia are

reduced (Andrieu et al., 2001). 

b. Overview of Pesticide Use and Usage
5

The Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) provided a Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA) 

to provide estimates of the actual usage of famoxadone on agricultural crops (USEPA, 2014). All 

registered uses of famoxadone are agricultural and include crops such as caneberries, fruiting, leafy, and 

bulb vegetables, cucurbits, potatoes, hops, and grapes to control and/or manage fungal and bacterial 

disease. Famoxadone is registered for the control of downy mildew and suppression of bacterial soft rot 

and Xanthomonas blight of bulb vegetables; leaf spot diseases of caneberries; Alternaria leaf blight, 

anthracnose, and bacterial fruit blotch of cucurbits; downy mildew of grapes, hops and leafy vegetables; 

early and late blight of potatoes, and various fungal diseases of tomatoes. It is primarily used on 

potatoes, cucumbers, tomatoes and peppers as shown in Table 1. In recent years (2008-2012), 

approximately 41,000 lbs a.i. were used to treat an average of 352,000 acres in the U.S. at an overall

average application rate of 0.12 lb a.i. per acre. The predominant uses of famoxadone in terms of 

percent crop treated are cucumbers (25%), caneberries (15%), and potatoes, onions, peppers, and 

pumpkin (10% each). Highest total application in terms of acres treated was to potatoes (10,000), 

cucumbers (8,000), tomatoes (6,000) and peppers (3,000). With the exception of the manufacturing 

process, all registered uses of famoxadone are in the form of a mixture known as Tanos (25% 

famoxadone, 25% cymoxanil) formulated as water dispersible granules (dry flowable) applied via 

ground, air, or chemigation equipment. Appendix B summarizes the labeled uses of famoxadone. The 

highest registered application rate is for bulb onions, bulb vegetables, and spinach at a maximum annual 

application rate of 1.31 lbs a.i./A. Appendix B presents the agricultural uses and corresponding 

application rates (single and maximum), application interval, and methods of application that will be 

considered in the Registration Review risk assessment. In the event that a parameter is not specified on 

the label, the Agency may make conservative assumptions to estimate environmental exposure. In the 

case of the labeled use of tanos on spinach, the maximum application rates are written in terms of

applications per cropping cycle. In the absence of these data, the 8 applications per cropping season 

written on the label will be assumed to be the maximum number of annual applications as well. 

Table 1: Estimates of the Actual Usage of Famoxadone on Agricultural Crops (USEPA, 2014).

Crop

Average 

Annual Lbs. 

A.I.

Percent Crop Treated

Average Maximum

Caneberries 1,000 15 25

Cantaloupes <500* 5 10

Cucumbers 8,000 25 50

Grapes, wine <500 <1 <2.5

Lettuce 2,000 5 10

Onions 2,000 10 15

Peppers 3,000 10 20

Potatoes 10,000 10 20

Pumpkins 1,000 10 15

Spinach <500 <2.5 <2.5

Squash 1,000 10 25

Tomatoes 6,000 5 25

Watermelons 1,000 <2.5 5

*All numbers rounded.
6

4. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments

a. Previous Ecological Risk and Drinking Water Assessments

Famoxadone was first registered in July of 2003. The Agency has conducted multiple risk assessments on 

famoxadone that serve as a basis for this scoping document, including 3 New Use assessments and one 

Section 18 Assessment. The ecological risk and drinking water assessments conducted by EFED are 

summarized in Appendix C. The most recent assessment was carried out in 2008 (D349252) on bulb 

vegetables group 3, leafy greens subgroup 4A, leaf petioles subgroup 4B, cilantro and caneberry

subgroup 13A; the risk concerns identified based on the highest application rate (bulb vegetables) were: 

 Chronic risk to mammals (Listed and non-listed)

 Chronic risk to birds (Listed and non-listed)

 Acute risk to freshwater fish (Listed and non-listed)

 Acute risk to freshwater invertebrates (Listed and non-listed)

 Chronic risk to freshwater invertebrates (Listed and non-listed)

 Acute risk to estuarine/marine fish (Listed and non-listed)

 Acute risk to estuarine/marine invertebrates (Listed and non-listed)

Previous assessments have also identified risk concerns to the following taxa: 

 Acute risk to birds (Caneberry, USEPA 2006)

 Acute risks to mammals (Soybeans, USEPA, 2005)

b. Drinking Water Assessment

The latest drinking water exposure assessment was conducted in 2008 for famoxadone and its 

degradates IN-MN468, IN-MN467, IN-MN968, and IN-JL856 following the total toxic residue (TTR) 

approach in association with the proposed uses on leafy greens subgroup 4A, bulb vegetables group 3, 

cilantro, caneberry subgroup 13A, and leaf petioles subgroup 4B (D347671, D347674). 

c. Clean Water Act Programs

Famoxadone is not identified as a cause of impairment for any water bodies listed as impaired under 

section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. No Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) criteria have been 

developed for famoxadone. Aquatic benchmarks have been established for famoxadone and are 

available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed 1/ecorisk_ders/aquatic_life_benchmark.htm. Any data 

submitted or otherwise located as part of the registration review process may be used to update aquatic 

life benchmarks, if applicable.

5. Environmental Fate and Transport

The major routes of degradation for famoxadone include alkaline-catalyzed hydrolysis, 

photodegradation in water and aerobic biodegradation in terrestrial and aquatic environments. 

Famoxadone does not appear to be persistent in the environment. Under alkaline conditions the 

hydrolytic half-life of famoxadone is on the order of a few hours (MRID 44946336). The aqueous 

photolysis half-life is equivalent to 4.6 days of natural sunlight (MRID 44946337). Soil photolysis halflives from two radiolabels are 9.5 days and 16.2 days (MRID 44946338). Aerobic biodegradation occurs 
7

faster than anaerobic biodegradation in terrestrial environments with seven aerobic half-lives ranging 

from 3.1 days to 38.3 days (MRID 44946339, MRID 44946402), compared to 33.5 days and 36.1 days for 

two radiolabels in an anaerobic soil study (MRID 44946404). In addition, three aerobic aquatic half-lives 

were less than or equal to 3.5 days (MRID 44946405). No anaerobic aquatic metabolism data has been 

submitted to the Agency and remains a data gap for registration review. 

Famoxadone is expected to possess low mobility in soils based upon Koc values ranging from 3307 to 

4030, indicating low potential for leaching into ground water (MRID 44946407, 46350401). Comparing 

Koc values, famoxadone degradates IN-KF015 and IN-JS940 are more mobile than the parent compound, 

but aerobic soil metabolism studies indicate that these degradates are shorter lived than parent 

famoxadone (MRID 44946409, 45294102, 45358801). A batch equilibrium study shows the degradate 

IN-KZ007 to be less mobile than famoxadone depending on soil type (MRID 45294104).

Terrestrial Field Dissipation (TFD) studies (MRID 44946410, 45294105, 45294106, 45358802) showed 

movement of parent and residues but none were detected below 15 cm (6 inches). In addition, an aged 

soil column leaching study showed famoxadone did not leach below the top 5 cm of the soil column 

(MRID 44946406). 

Volatilization is not expected to be an important transport process since famoxadone has a relatively 

low vapor pressure and Henry's Law constant. Famoxadone has limited water solubility (52 μg/L at 20 

degrees C). A bioconcentration study in bluegill sunfish shows that famoxadone has the tendency to 

bioconcentrate in aquatic organisms (2584X-3425X in whole fish tissues); however, depuration appears 

to be rapid (50% elimination rate by day 2 of the depuration period) so it is not likely to bioaccumulate 

in the food chain (MRID 44946413). The important physical and chemical properties for famoxadone 

are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Nature of the Chemical Stressor 

Parameter Value Source/MRID #

Common name Famoxadone

Product Chemistry

CAS number 131807-57-3

Chemical name 3-anilino-5-methylB5-(4-phenoxyphenyl)-1,3-

oxazolidine-2,4-dione

Chemical Class

Chemical Category

Oxazolidinedione

Fungicide

SMILES Notation clcc(Oc2ccccc2)ccclC3(C)C(=O)N(Nc4ccccc4)C(=O)O3

Empirical formula C22H18N2O4

Structure

Molecular Mass 374.4 g/mole

Water Solubility 0.052 mg/L at 20 oC Tomlin, 2003
8

Parameter Value Source/MRID #

Vapor pressure (20C) 4.8 x 10

-9 mm Hg Tomlin, 2003

Henry’s Law Constant 4.5 x 10

-8 atm m3/mol Calculated1

Octanol/water partition 

coefficient (log Kow) 4.65 Tomlin, 2003

Hydrolysis (t1/2)

pH 5 = 31 days at 25C

pH 7 = 2.7 days at 25C

pH 9 = 1.8 hours at 25C

44946336

Direct Aqueous 

Photolysis (t1/2)

4.6 days 44946337

Soil Photolysis

(t1/2)

9.5 days 

16.2 days 44946338

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 

(t1/2)

Famoxadone (parent)

28.3 days (loamy sand)

38.3 days (sandy loam)

4.5 days (silt loam)

6.1 days (silt loam 10 ◦C)

3.1 days (silt loam 20 ◦C)

8.9 days (sandy loam)

7.6 days (sandy loam)

44946339

44946339

44946339

44946339

44946339

44946402

44946402

IN-KF015 (degradate)

1.2 days 44946409

IN-JS940 (degradate)

20.4 hours (sandy clay loam)

24.0 hours (loam)

5.0 hours (sandy loam)

45294102

IN-KZ007 (degradate)

2.5 days (sandy clay loam)

18.3 days (loam)

11.8 days (sandy loam)

45358801

Anaerobic Soil 

Metabolism

(t1/2) 

33.5 days

36.1 days

44946404

Aerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism

(t1/2)

1.2 days (pH 7.1)

1.4 days (pH 7.7)

3.5 days (pH 7.7)

44946405

Anaerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism

(t1/2)

Data Gap --
9

Parameter Value Source/MRID #

Soil Partition Coefficient 

(Koc)

Famoxadone (parent)

3890 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Soil

3330 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Loam

4030 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Clay Loam

3307 mL g o.c.-1 for Silty Clay Loam

44946407

44946407

44946407

46350401

IN-KF015 (degradate)

130 mL g o.c.-1 for Silty Clay Loam

210 mL g o.c.-1 for Loamy Sand

1300 mL g o.c.-1 for Silt Loam

380 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Loam

44946409

IN-JS940 (degradate)

515 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Clay Loam

33 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Loam

591 mL g o.c.-1 for Loam

179 mL g o.c.-1 for Loam

45294103

IN-KZ007 (degradate)

34,423 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Clay Loam

11,331 mL g o.c.-1 for Loam

7,828 mL g o.c.-1 for Loam

1,238 mL g o.c.-1 for Sandy Loam

45294104

Aged Soil Column 

Leaching

Famoxadone did not leach beyond the top 5 cm of the 

soil column. 44946406

Terrestrial Field 

Dissipation 

(DT50)

6.5 days (MD silt loam)

12 days (FL sand)

28 days (CA silty clay loam)

19.7 days (MN loam)

30.5 days (CA sandy loam)

26.4 days (IL clay loam)

10.1 days (WA sand)

12.5 days (Canadian loamy sand)

32.9 days (Canadian gravelly fine sandy loam)

44946410

44946410

44946410

45294105

45294105

45294106

45294106

45358802

45358802

Bioaccumulation in Fish

(BCF)

Radiolabel 1

971X in edible tissues

3327X for inedible tissues

2584X for whole fish

50% eliminated by day 2 

of the depuration period

Radiolabel 2

1286X in edible tissues

3608X for inedible tissues

3425X for whole fish

50% eliminated by day 2 

of the depuration period

44946413

1 = Henry’s Law (atm-m3/mole) = (VAPR/760)/(SOL/MWT), where VAPR is vapor pressure in torr, MWT 

is molecular weight in g/mol, and SOL is the solubility in water in mg/L.

a. Transformational Products
10

Eight degradates were identified for famoxadone. They are IN-JS940, IN-H3310, IN-JL856, IN-MN468, INKF015, IN-KZ007, IN-MN467, and IN-MN968. In soil, the dominant metabolites of famoxadone are INKZ007 and IN-JS940. IN-MN467 and IN-MN468 were also detected in small amounts (<2% of applied 

radioactivity). A soil photolysis study detected IN-KF015 (max. 22% on day 1; degrades further to INJS940 which degrades to IN-H3310), IN-H3310 (increased to 27%), IN-MN468 (increased to 13%), INMN467 (increased to 18%) and IN-JS940 (<7%). In water, several degradation products were formed 

due to hydrolysis, but only IN-JS940 and IN-H3310 were stable. In water-sediment studies IN-JS940 

reached a maximum of 20.5 % in water and 3.5 % in sediment on day 3, whereas IN-H3310 reached a 

maximum of 2.3 % in water and 10.7 % in sediment on day 7.

For the ecological risk assessment, the parent famoxadone along with the following degradates INJS940, IN-H3310, IN-JL856, IN-MN468, IN-KF015, IN-KZ007, IN-MN467, and IN-MN968 will be assessed. 

The residues of concern will be determined after the degradate toxicity data (data called-in) has been 

reviewed by the Agency.

For the drinking water assessment, parent famoxadone including the degradates IN-MN467, IN-MN468, 

IN-JL856, and IN-MN968 will be assessed together following the total toxic residue (TTR) approach 

following the recommendation of HED’s MARC Decision memorandum. The memorandum along with 

the rationale for selection of degradates can be found in Appendix G. 

6. Receptors

Consistent with the process described in the Overview Document (USEPA, 2004), the risk assessment for 

famoxadone relies on a surrogate species approach. Toxicological data generated from surrogate test 

species, which are intended to be representative of broad taxonomic groups, are used to extrapolate 

the potential effects on a variety of species (receptors) included under these taxonomic groupings.

Acute and chronic toxicity data from studies submitted by pesticide registrants along with the available 

open literature will be used to evaluate the potential direct and indirect effects of famoxadone to 

aquatic and terrestrial receptors. This includes toxicity on the technical grade active ingredient, 

degradates, and when available, formulated products (e.g., "Six-Pack" studies). The open literature 

studies are identified through EPA's ECOTOXicology (ECOTOX) database which employs a literature 

search engine for locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. Data 

from an ECOTOX run for famoxadone will be evaluated for possible quantitative and/or qualitative 

inclusion in the risk assessment in support of Registration Review.

Table 3 provides a summary of the terrestrial and aquatic toxicity endpoints used to characterize the 

potential acute and chronic ecological effects of famoxadone. Table 4 list the toxicity endpoints for 

formulations of famoxadone and cymoxanil. These formulations are intended to test the toxicity of the

typical end-use product (TEP) Tanos® (formulation containing 25% famoxadone and 25% cymoxanil). 

Available data on Tanos® suggest that technical grade famoxadone is similar in toxicity to famoxadone in 

the formulation, except in the case of acute toxicity to mammals, where the Tanos® TEP is more toxic.

Toxicity endpoints for five of the major degradation products IN-JS940, IN-H3310, IN-JL856, IN-MN468, 

IN-KF015 are listed in Table 5. Preliminary review of these studies indicates that the toxicity of 

famoxadone degradates is equally or less toxic than the parent compound. Additional detail is included 

in the tables.

a. Effects to Terrestrial and Aquatic Organisms
11

Based on terrestrial toxicity endpoints, famoxadone is practically non-toxic to birds, mammals, honey 

bees and terrestrial plants. In terms of chronic toxicity, the two avian test species bobwhite quail and 

mallard were equally sensitive while the rat was used as a surrogate species for all mammalian taxa. As a 

result these endpoints should be considered in future risk assessments. 

Famoxadone is very highly toxic to freshwater fish, estuarine and marine fish, estuarine/marine 

invertebrates, and freshwater invertebrates. The most sensitive freshwater fish species is the rainbow 

trout, while the most sensitive estuarine/marine fish species is the sheepshead minnow. The most 

sensitive estuarine/marine invertebrate species to acute exposure to famoxadone was the eastern 

oyster, while the water flea was the most sensitive freshwater invertebrate species to acute exposure. 

The most sensitive aquatic plant species is the freshwater diatom, Navicula pelliculosa. Toxicity 

endpoints were non-definitive for the aquatic vascular plant Lemna gibba and the marine diatom 

Skeletonema costatum.

Table 3: Famoxadone TGAI Toxicity Data for Terrestrial Taxa

Taxa Study Type Species Toxicity Value & Category MRID & Status Endpoints Affected

Birds

Acute Oral 

850.2100

Northern 

Bobwhite

Colinus 

virginianus

LD50 >2250 mg a.i./kg-bw

NOEL=2250 mg a.i./kg-bw

Practically Non-Toxic

44946232

Acceptable 

No effects

Acute Dietary

850.2200

Mallard Duck 

Anas 

platyrhynchos

LD50 >5620 mg a.i./kg-diet

NOEL= 5620 mg a.i./kgdiet

Practically Non-Toxic

44946234

Acceptable 

No effects

Acute Dietary 

850.2200

Northern 

Bobwhite

Colinus 

virginianus

LD50 >5620 mg a.i./L 

NOEL= 5620 mg a.i./L

44946233

Acceptable

No effects

Chronic

Reproduction

850.2300

Northern 

Bobwhite

Colinus 

virginianus

NOEC= 46 mg a.i/L 

LOEC= 252 mg a.i./L

44946235

Acceptable 

Normal hatchlings, 

14-day survivors

Chronic

Reproduction

850.2300

Mallard Duck

Anas 

platyrhynchos

NOEC= 46 mg a.i./L

LOEC= 252 mg a.i./L 

44946237

Acceptable 

14-day survivors 

and viable 

embryos/ eggs set

Mammals

Acute Oral

870.1100

Rat

Rattus 

norvegicus

LD50 >5000 mg a.i./kgbody weight

Practically Non-Toxic

44302407

Acceptable

No effects

Acute 

Inhalation

870.1300

Rat

Rattus 

norvegicus

LD50= 5.3 mg/L 47419208 

Acceptable

Weight loss, 

Lethargy

Chronic twogeneration 

reproduction

870.4100

Rat

Rattus 

norvegicus

LOAEC= 800 mg a.i./kg 

diet

NOAEC= 200 mg a.i./kg 

diet

44302428

Acceptable

Decreased glucose 

(Males); decreased 

weight gain, 

decreased food 
12

Taxa Study Type Species Toxicity Value & Category MRID & Status Endpoints Affected

consumption, 

decreased food 

efficiency, mild 

hemolytic anemia, 

decreased globulin 

(females)

Terrestrial 

invertebrates

Acute Oraladult

Non-guideline

(OECD 213)

Honey Bee

Apis mellifera

LD50 >1000 mg/kg

NOEC= 1000 mg/kg

Practically Non-Toxic

44946325

Supplemental

Non guidelineEndpoints not 

valid for risk 

assessment as 

solvent was not 

used to mix 

spiked food 

source, 

concentrations 

were not 

measured 

during 

experiment

No effects

Acute ContactAdult

850.3020

Honey Bee

Apis mellifera

LD50 >25.0 μg a.i./bee

NOEC =25 μg a.i./bee

Practically Non-Toxic

44946326

Acceptable 

No effects

Terrestrial 

Plants

Seedling 

Emergence

850.4100

MonocotsCorn (Zea 

mays), Onion

(Allium cepa), 

Sorghum

(Sorghum 

bicolor), Wheat

(Triticum 

aestivum)

EC25 >0.187 lbs a.i./A

NOAEC= 0.187 lbs a.i./A

44946319

Acceptable

Mean dry weight, 

height

DicotsCucumber

(Cucumis 

sativus), Pea

(Pisum 

sativum), 

Rapeseed

(Brassica 

napus), 

EC25 >0.187 lbs a.i./A

NOAEC= 0.187 lbs a.i./A

44946319

Acceptable

Mean dry weight, 

height 
13

Taxa Study Type Species Toxicity Value & Category MRID & Status Endpoints Affected

Soybean

(Glycine max), 

Sugar Beet

(Beta vulgaris), 

Tomato

(Lycopersicon 

esculentum)

Vegetative 

Vigor

850.4150

MonocotsCorn, Onion, 

Sorghum, 

Wheat

EC25 >0.187 lbs a.i./A

NOAEC= 0.187 lbs a.i./A

44946319

Acceptable

Mean dry weight

DicotsCucumber, 

Pea, Rapeseed, 

Soybean, Sugar 

Beet, Tomato

EC25 >0.187 lbs a.i./A

NOAEC= 0.187 lbs a.i./A

44946319

Acceptable

Mean dry weight

Freshwater 

Fish

Acute

850.1075

Rainbow Trout

Oncorhynchus 

mykiss

LC50= 12 μg a.i./L

NOEC= 5.2 μg a.i/L

Very Highly Toxic

44946239

SupplementalNon-guidelineMean measured 

recoveries low. 

Endpoints valid 

for risk 

assessment

Mortality, dark 

coloration, partial 

loss of equilibrium, 

and erratic 

swimming

Chronic (Early 

Life Stage)

850.1400

Rainbow Trout

Oncorhynchus 

mykiss

NOEL= 1.4 μg a.i./L

LOEL= 4.1 μg a.i./L

44946312

Acceptable 

Percent 

abnormalities in 

surviving fish at 90 

days

Estuarine/ 

Marine Fish

Acute

850.1075

Sheepshead 

Minnow

Cyprinodon 

variegatus

EC50= 49.4 μg a.i./L 

NOEC= 27.7 μg a.i./L

Very highly Toxic

44946309

Acceptable 

Mortality

Chronic (Early 

Life Stage)

850.1400

Sheepshead 

Minnow

Cyprinodon 

variegatus

NOEL= 5.58 μg a.i./L

LOEL= 11.2 μg a.i./L

44946314

Acceptable 

Hatch survival 

Estuarine/ 

Marine 

Invertebrate

Acute

850.1025

Eastern Oyster

Crassostrea 

virginica

LC50= 1.6 μg a.i./L

NOEC= 1.10 μg a.i./L

Very Highly toxic

44946310

Acceptable 

Shell deposition

Chronic Life 

Cycle

850.1350

Mysid Shrimp

Mysidopsis 

bahia

NOEL= 0.830 μg a.i./L

LOEL= 1.72 μg a.i./L

44946315

Acceptable 

Survival of first 

generation males 

and females

Freshwater 

Invertebrates

Acute

850.1010

Water Flea

Daphnia 

magna

EC50= 11.8 μg a.i./L 

NOEC= 3.5 μg a.i./L

44946307

Supplementalendpoints can

Mortality
14

Taxa Study Type Species Toxicity Value & Category MRID & Status Endpoints Affected

Very highly Toxic be used for risk 

assessments2

Chronic

850.1300

Water Flea

Daphnia 

magna

NOEC= 0.085 μg a.i./L

LOEC= 0.29 μg a.i./L

44946313

Acceptable 

Number of 

Offspring Produced

Whole 

sediment: 

Chronic 

invertebrates

Midge: 

Chironomus 

riparius

Sediment: 

28-day EC50 2.73 mg ai/kg

NOEC <0.070 mg ai/kg

Pore Water 

28-Day EC50=15.04 mg ai/L 

NOEC <0.55 mg ai/L

44946308

Supplemental: 

Endpoints can

only be used 

qualitativelyuncertainty 

surrounding the 

amount of 

famoxadone 

sorbed to 

sediment and 

amount present 

in pore water.

--

Aquatic 

Plants

Vascular

850.4400

Duckweed 

Lemna gibba

EC50 >81 μg a.i./L

NOAEC= 81 μg a.i./L

44946320

Acceptable

No Effect

Non-Vascular

850.4500

Marine Diatom

Skeletonema 

costatum

EC50 >75 μg a.i./L

NOEC =75 μg a.i./L

44946321

Acceptable

No Effect

Non-Vascular

850.4500

Freshwater 

Diatom

Navicula 

pelliculosa

EC50 =13.5 μg a.i./L

EC05 = 2.6 μg a.i./L

44946323

Supplemental

Cell Density

Non-Vascular

850.4500 

Green Algae

Pseudokirchner

iella 

subcapitata

EC50: 23 μg a.i./L

NOEC: 3.9 μg a.i./L

44946322

Acceptable 

Area Under Growth 

Curve

Non-Vascular 

850.4500

Blue-Green 

Algae

Anabaena flosaquae

EC50 >84.3 μg a.i./L

NOEC: 42.6 μg a.i./L

44946324

Acceptable 

Cell Density and 

Growth Rate

b. Toxicity of Famoxadone Formulations

All commercially registered famoxadone formulations consists of famoxadone and cymoxanil, so it is 

important to compare the toxicity of these two compounds together to determine if synergistic effects 

are present. Table 4 shows the LC50 from acute exposure of famoxadone TEP to various taxa. In the case 

of rainbow trout (MRID 46144801), the LC50 value for the formulation (11 μg a.i./L) is similar to 

famoxadone TGAI (13 μg a.i./L). In both cases, famoxadone is classified as very highly toxic to freshwater 

fish. The acute oral toxicity of the famoxadone TEP to rats (Female LD50= 566 mg/kg-bw) was found to 
15

be greater to rats than famoxadone TGAI (LD50 >5000 mg a.i./kg-body weight), while the inhalation 

toxicity (LC50 >5.1 mg/L) was found to be less than that observed for famoxadone TGAI (LD50= 5.3 mg/L). 

Famoxadone/cymoxanil TEP exposure to northern bobwhite quails resulted in non-definitive endpoints

(LD50: >511 mg famoxadone/kg-bw), which was also the case for the TGAI (LD50: >2250 mg a.i./kg). In 

the case of the honey bee, the LD50s for oral and contact or the TEP (>200 μg famoxadone/bee) were 

non definitive and tested at a level lower than the TGAI (LD50 >1000 mg/kg), but there is no evidence of 

increased toxicity. With the exception of mammals, there is no indication that TEP is of greater toxicity 

than famoxadone TGAI for these taxa.

The toxicity of famoxadone/cymoxanil TEP to terrestrial plants, estuarine/ marine taxa and freshwater 

invertebrates was not tested and this remains an uncertainty. The registrant is encouraged to submit 

data that assess the toxicity of famoxadone TEP to aquatic taxa in order to better characterize the risk of 

this mixture to aquatic ecosystems, but this is not a formal data gap at this time.

Table 4: Toxicity Endpoints for Famoxadone TEP

Taxnonomic 

Group

Study Type Formulation 

%famoxadone

/ %cymoxanil

Species Toxicity Value & Category MRID & Status

Freshwater Fish

Acute 25%/25% Rainbow 

Trout

Oncorhync

hus mykiss

Total Formulation

LC50: 29.0 μg /L

NOAEC: 14.1 μg /L

Famoxadone

LC50: 11 μg a.i./L

NOAEC: 5.7 μg a.i./L

Very Highly Toxic

46144801

Acceptable

Freshwater Fish

Acute 22.7%/30.4% Rainbow 

Trout

Oncorhync

hus mykiss

LC50: 

 >100 μg 

formulation/L

 >22.5 μg 

famoxadone/L

 >30 μg 

cymoxanil/L

Very highly toxic

44946302

SupplementalScientifically sound, 

non-guideline

Mammals

Acute Oral 25%/25% Rat 

Rattus 

norvegicus

Male LD50= 1732 mg/kg-bw 

Female LD50= 566 mg/kg-bw

Slightly toxic

44944507

Acceptable

Acute 

Inhalation

25%/25% Rat 

Rattus 

norvegicus

LC50 >5.1 mg/L 44944509

Acceptable

Birds

Acute Oral 22.7%/30.4% Northern 

Bobwhite

Colinus 

virginianus

LD50: 

 >2250 mg 

formulation/kg-bw

 >511 mg 

famoxadone/kg-bw

44946318

SupplementalScientifically sound, 

non-guideline
16

Taxnonomic 

Group

Study Type Formulation 

%famoxadone

/ %cymoxanil

Species Toxicity Value & Category MRID & Status

 >684 mg 

cymoxanil/kg-bw 

Moderately Toxic

Terrestrial 

Vertebrates

Acute Oral 

and 

Contact

22.7%/30.4% Honey Bee

Apis 

mellifera

Contact LD50:

 >200 μg 

formulation/bee

 >200 μg 

famoxadone/bee

Oral LD50:

 >200 μg 

formulation/bee

 >45.5 μg 

famoxadone/bee

Practically Nontoxic on an 

Acute Oral and Contact 

Basis

46350402

Contact: Acceptable

Oral: Supplemental

(Non-Guideline)

Honey Bee 

Residue on 

Foliage

850.3030

25%/25% Honey Bee

Apis 

mellifera

TEP: RT25<1 Hour

Famoxadone: RT25< 1 Hour

No effects

46350403

SupplementalEndpoints valid for use 

in risk assessment

c. Toxicity of Famoxadone Degradates

The toxicity of degradates was analyzed with the Ecological Structure Activity Relationship (ECOSAR) 

methods(http://www.epa.gov/oppt/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm). This program attempts to predict 

toxicity of degradate molecules using known toxicity endpoints of functional groups in the molecule. 

Shown in Table 5, this analysis was unable to accurately predict the toxicity of the parent molecule. As a 

result, no accurate conclusions could be made about famoxadone degradates based on the ECOSAR 

modeling. 

Table 5: A Comparison of the Predicted Parent Famoxadone Toxicity Values as Modeled by ECOSAR 

Taxa Predicted Toxicity LC50 (mg/l) Actual Toxicity (mg/l)

Freshwater Fish LC50=0.703 0.012

Daphnid LC50=0.575 0.019

Green Algae LC50=0.056 0.023

Mysid Shrimp LC50=0.079 0.00083

The degradate IN-JS940-1 was assessed for toxicity to rainbow trout and Daphnia magna, as shown in 

Table 6. The rainbow trout study did not fulfil guideline requirements, as it was only conducted at onetenth of the solubility limit of this compound, but the non-definitive endpoint (>9.0 μg/L) for the 

degradate was far greater than the LC50 for the parent. Additional endpoints were presented that 

compared the acute toxicity of famoxadone to the freshwater invertebrate, Daphnia magna to the 
17

toxicity of five degradates. The degradate toxicity endpoints shown in Table 6 will not be considered 

valid until the data are evaluated by the Agency, but preliminary observation suggests that these 

degradates are less toxic than the parent. In the event that these data are not found to be acceptable, 

these studies will be treated as data gaps and the toxicity of famoxadone degradates will be considered 

to be an uncertainty. 

Table 6: Endpoints for Aquatic Toxicity Studies for Famoxadone Degradates 

Taxonomic 

Group

Study 

Type

Species Chemical Toxicity Value 

& Category

MRID & Status

Freshwater 

Fish

Acute Rainbow Trout

Oncorhynchus 

mykiss

IN-JS940-1 LC50: >9.0 mg 

a.i./L

NOEC: 9.0 mg 

a.i./L 

Moderately 

Toxic

44946306

SupplementalNon guidelinenot tested to full 

solubility limit 

Freshwater 

Invertebrate

Acute Water Flea

Daphnia magna

Famoxadone 48-hour 

EC50=0.011 mg 

a.i./L

Very Highly 

Toxic

44946307

Supplementalendpoints can be 

used for risk 

assessments

Acute Water Flea

Daphnia magna

IN-JS940 48-hour EC50

>9.6 mg a.i./L 

Moderately

Toxic

44946305

SupplementalNon-guidelinetested to onetenth of the 

solubility limit. 

Endpoints can be 

used to compare 

toxicity to that of 

parent. 

Acute Water Flea

Daphnia magna

IN-H3310 48-hour EC50

>2.7 mg a.i./L 

Moderately 

Toxic

In Review

Acute Water Flea

Daphnia magna

IN-JL856 48-hour EC50

>0.19 mg a.i./L 

Highly Toxic

In Review

Acute Water Flea

Daphnia magna

IN-MN468 48-hour EC50

>0.012 mg a.i./L 

Very Highly 

Toxic

In Review
18

Taxonomic 

Group

Study 

Type

Species Chemical Toxicity Value 

& Category

MRID & Status

Acute Water Flea

Daphnia magna

IN-KF015 48-hour EC50

>8.3 mg a.i./L 

Moderately 

Toxic

In Review

d. Ecological Incidents

Three databases, the Ecological Incident Information System or EIIS maintained by the Environmental 

Fate and Effects Division, the Aggregate Summary Module (ASM) of the Office of Pesticide Program's 

Incident database maintained by the Information Technology and Resource Management Division, and 

the Avian Incident Monitoring System (AIMS) maintained by the American Bird Conservancy, were 

searched on October 17, 2014 to locate incidents resulting from the use of famoxadone. 

One incident was recorded in the EIIS database by DuPont, as having occurred on or about May 7, 2010 

in Santa Barbara County, California. The report indicated that several fields of celery allegedly exhibited 

unexpected brown spots on the petioles a few days after commercial applications of Tanos was applied 

to approximately 60 acres of celery crop. There was no mention of residue testing and famoxadone was 

listed as possibly causing the damage. 

In addition to the incidents recorded in EIIS and AIMS, additional incidents are reported to the Agency in 

aggregated form. Pesticide registrants report certain types of incidents to the Agency as aggregate 

counts of incidents occurring per product per quarter. Ecological incidents reported in aggregate 

reports include those categorized as ‘minor fish and wildlife’ (W-B), ‘minor plant’ (P-B), and ‘other nontarget’ (ONT) incidents. ‘Other non-target’ incidents include reports of adverse effects to insects and 

other terrestrial invertebrates. For famoxadone, registrants have not reported minor incidents as of 

October 8, 2014. 

7. Exposure Pathways of Concern

In order to estimate risks of famoxadone exposures in aquatic and terrestrial environments, all exposure 

modeling and resulting risk conclusions will be based on registered labels including maximum 

famoxadone application rates and intervals cited in Appendix B. EFED's environmental exposure models 

estimate the potential exposure of plants and animals to pesticide residues in aquatic and terrestrial 

environments. Some of the aquatic models can also be utilized to estimate pesticide residues in drinking 

water for use in the dietary exposure models. A more detailed description of aquatic and terrestrial 

models can be found at the following website: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/models_db.htm. 

For terrestrial exposures, the default 35-day foliar dissipation half-life will be used. If RQs exceed LOCs, 

the foliar dissipation half-life may be refined, as appropriate, using available magnitude of residue 

studies at the time of the risk assessment.

In addition to modeling estimates, available monitoring data will be evaluated. Monitoring data will 

include those collected/reported by states as well as other federal departments/agencies (e.g.,
19

USGS National Water Quality Assessment; http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa). These monitoring data will be 

characterized in terms of general statistics including number of samples, frequency of detection, 

maximum concentration, and mean value of all detections, where that level of detail is available.

The Screening Imbibition Program (SIP v.1.0) is used during the problem formulation phase of

Registration Review to provide an upper-bound estimate of exposure of birds and mammals to 

pesticides through drinking water alone. SIP does not aggregate the drinking water exposure route with 

other exposure routes (i.e., dietary, inhalation, dermal). Because avian and mammalian acute toxicity 

values were non-definitive and toxicity to these taxa low, SIP was not used, and it is assumed that acute 

and chronic exposure through drinking water alone would not be a concern for birds and mammals. A 

full table of inputs and outputs from the model is available in Appendix D.

The Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk (STIR v.1.0) is used during the problem formulation phase of 

Registration Review to assess the potential for exposure to birds and mammals through inhalation. The 

exposure pathways that are assessed by this tool include both droplet inhalation and vapor phase 

inhalation. STIR is intended to determine if exposure is likely and not whether or not the potential for 

risk exists. If STIR predicts that exposure is likely, additional inhalation data may be necessary to 

adequately assess risk due to the inhalation exposure pathway. STIR concluded that exposure through 

inhalation would not be a concern for mammals (acute rat inhalation LC50 > 5.3 mg/L; MRID 44302410).

STIR concluded that exposure through inhalation could be a concern for birds, but due to the nondefinitive endpoints and low avian toxicity, it was determined that additional data were not needed. The 

result of this analysis is available in Appendix E.

8. Analysis Plan

a. Stressors of Concern

In order to address the risk hypothesis, the potential for adverse effects on the environment is

estimated. The use, environmental fate, and ecological effects of famoxadone are characterized and 

integrated to assess the risks. This analysis plan will be revisited and may be revised depending upon a 

full review of the data available in the open literature and the information submitted by the public in 

response to the opening of the Registration Review docket.

i. Ecological Risk Assessment

The stressor of ecological concern for aquatic organisms is famoxadone. Submitted studies indicate that 

the degradate IN-JS940-1 is less toxic than the parent. Other degradates IN-KF015, IN-H3310 2, INMN468, and IN-JL856 have toxicity data that were submitted for review. If these degradates are found 

to be of similarly low toxicity, the stressor of concern for aquatic organisms will be famoxadone alone. 

ii. Drinking Water Assessment

The drinking water assessments conducted to support the Registration Review human health risk 

assessments of famoxadone will incorporate modeled estimates of famoxadone residues of concern, 

which are parent compound famoxadone and degradates IN-MN468, IN-MN467, IN-MN968, and INJL856, in surface and ground waters. The famoxadone residues of concern may be reevaluated pending 

receipt and review of additional environmental fate and toxicity data for famoxadone and its 

degradates. Famoxadone and degradates IN-MN468, IN-MN467, IN-MN968, and IN-JL856 will be 
20

assessed together in the drinking water assessment using a total toxic residues (TTR) approach following

the recommendation of HED’s MARC Decision memorandum (D288134; Appendix G).

b. Measures of Exposure

EFED will use standard available models to evaluate potential exposures to aquatic and terrestrial 

organisms as described at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/models_db.htm. Pending results of 

aquatic toxicity studies on the aquatic degradates of famoxadone, these degradates may be included 

with famoxadone in the residues of concern modeled for aquatic exposure. Because of the lack of 

available data, famoxadone and the degradates are assumed to have similar toxicity to terrestrial 

organisms, and a total toxic residues approach may be used for terrestrial modeling. 

Screening level calculations have suggested that chronic drinking water and inhalation exposure 

pathways may be significant to birds. These exposure pathways may be further considered at the time 

of the risk assessment.

i. Available Monitoring Data

The Agency is aware of monitoring conducted by federal and state agencies and this information will be 

considered in the assessment to the extent that data on famoxadone are available.

c. Measures of Effect

Toxicity data presented in Section 3 of this problem formulation will be used to calculate risk quotients. 

Any additional information submitted by the registrant or found in the open literature prior to conduct 

of the risk assessment will also be considered. The open literature studies are identified using EPA's 

ECOTOXicology database (ECOTOX) (USEPA, 2007c), which employs a literature search engine for 

locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. The evaluation of both 

sources of data can also provide insight into the direct and indirect effects of pesticides on biotic 

communities from loss of species that are sensitive to the chemicals and from changes in structure and 

functional characteristics of the affected communities.

9. Endangered Species Assessments

Consistent with EPA’s responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency will evaluate 

risks to federally listed threatened and endangered (listed) species from registered uses of pesticides in 

accordance with the Joint Interim Approaches developed to implement the recommendations of the 

April 2013 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report, Assessing Risks to Endangered and Threatened 

Species from Pesticides. The NAS report outlines recommendations on specific scientific and technical 

issues related to the development of pesticide risk assessments that EPA and the Services must conduct 

in connection with their obligations under the ESA and FIFRA. EPA will address concerns specific to 

famoxadone in connection with the development of its final registration review decision for 

famoxadone. 

In November 2013, EPA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries (the Services), and 

USDA released a white paper containing a summary of their joint Interim Approaches for assessing risks 

to listed species from pesticides. These Interim Approaches were developed jointly by the agencies in 

response to the NAS recommendations, and reflect a common approach to risk assessment shared by 

the agencies as a way of addressing scientific differences between the EPA and the Services. Details of 
21

the joint Interim Approaches are contained in the November 1, 2013 white paper, Interim Approaches 

for National-Level Pesticide Endangered Species Act Assessments Based on the Recommendations of the 

National Academy of Sciences April 2013 Report.

Given that the agencies are continuing to develop and work toward implementation of the Interim 

Approaches to assess the potential risks of pesticides to listed species and their designated critical 

habitat, this ecological problem formulation supporting the Preliminary Work Plan for famoxadone does 

not describe the specific ESA analysis, including effects determinations for specific listed species or 

designated critical habitat, to be conducted during registration review. While the agencies continue to 

develop a common method for ESA analysis, the planned risk assessment for the registration review of 

famoxadone will describe the level of ESA analysis completed for this particular registration review case. 

This assessment will allow EPA to focus its future evaluations on the types of species where the 

potential for effects exists, once the scientific methods being developed by the agencies have been fully 

vetted. Once the agencies have fully developed and implemented the scientific methods necessary to 

complete risk assessments for listed species and their designated critical habitats, these methods will be 

applied to subsequent analyses of famoxadone as part of completing this registration review.

10. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program 

Famoxadone was not included in the first group of 67 chemicals issued an order to conduct Tier 1

EDSP testing, or the second list of 109 chemicals issued in June, 2014. For additional information the 

EDSP program, visit http://www.epa.gov/endo/.

11. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps

a. Environmental Fate

Table 7: Data Gaps based on Submitted Environmental Fate Data for Famoxadone

Guideline Description MRID Classification Data 

Gap?

Comments

835.2120

161-1

Hydrolysis 44946336 Acceptable No --

835.2240

161-2

Photodegradation in 

Water

44946337 Acceptable No --

835.2410

161-3

Photodegradation in 

Soil

44946338 Acceptable No --

835.4100

162-1

Aerobic Soil 

Metabolism

44946339

44946402

Acceptable

Acceptable

No

No

--

--
22

Guideline Description MRID Classification Data 

Gap?

Comments

835.4200

162-2

Anaerobic Soil 

Metabolism

44946404 Acceptable Yes These data are required under 

40 CFR part 158 for terrestrial 

outdoor uses. One anaerobic 

soil metabolism study was 

submitted. The OCSPP guideline

recommends that these tests be 

performed with four soils. 

Because OCSPP uses an upper 

90th percentile estimate of soil 

metabolism half-lives based on 

available study data for 

modeling purposes, any 

additional data can reduce 

uncertainty related to the 

exposure assessment as well as 

the half-life value used in 

modeling. 

835.4300

162-4

Aerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism

44946405 Acceptable Yes One additional sediment-water 

system is needed to fulfill the 

data requirements as two 

different sediments with varying 

organic carbon content and 

texture are recommended in the 

OCSPP guidelines.

835.4400

162-3

Anaerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism

-- -- Yes No anaerobic aquatic 

metabolism data has been 

submitted to the Agency. Two 

sediment-water systems with 

varying organic carbon content 

and texture is needed to fulfill 

the data requirements.

835.1230 Adsorption/Desorption 44946407

46350401

44946409

45294103

45294104

Supplemental

Supplemental

Supplemental

Supplemental

Supplemental

No

No

No

No

No

Famoxadone

Famoxadone

IN-KF015

IN-JS940

IN-KZ007

835.1240

163-1 Leaching

44946406 Supplemental No Famoxadone
23

Guideline Description MRID Classification Data 

Gap?

Comments

835.6100

164-1

Terrestrial Field 

Dissipation

44946410

45294105

45294106

45358802

Supplemental

Supplemental

Supplemental

Supplemental

No

No

No

No

--

--

--

--

860.1380 Storage Stability in Soil -- -- Yes Storage stability was typically 

part of the terrestrial field 

dissipation study in the past but 

now has its own guideline 

number (860.1380)

Storage Stability in 

Water

-- -- Yes

850.7100 ECM/ILV – Soil -- -- Yes --

ECM/ILV – Water 44967204 Acceptable No BEAD performed ILV (D276595)

165-4 Bioaccumulation in Fish

(BCF)

44946413 Acceptable No --

b. Environmental Effects

Table 8 and Table 9 identify ecological effects studies by MRID that offer data for each guideline 

requirement, as well as study classifications and whether or not further data are needed in order to 

support risk assessments. A chronic sediment test (MRID 44946308) has been submitted that observed 

toxicity effects to the midge Chironomus dilutes, but endpoints are not valid to quantitatively assess risk 

because of questions surrounding the concentrations of famoxadone in sediment. Therefore, tests with 

the C. dilutes and freshwater amphipod Hyalella azteca are needed. A study with C. dilutes has been 

requested and is due on 6/30/2015. The estuarine/marine amphipod Leptocheirus plumulosus is 

requested because estuarine/marine invertebrate endpoints are more sensitive than freshwater 

invertebrate endpoints (11.8 μg/L vs. 3.76 μg/L). A tiered approach using toxicity data from sub-chronic 

(10-day) sediment toxicity tests with the three species may be used to determine which species should 

undergo chronic toxicity testing.

Table 8: Data Gaps based on Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for Famoxadone

OCSPP Guideline Data 

requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

MRID

Study 

Classifications

Data Gap? Comments

850.1010 Freshwater 

Invertebrate 

Acute Toxicity

44946307 Supplemental No Generally scientifically sound, 

and study deviations do not 

affect the endpoints

850.1025

850.1035

850.1045

850.1055

Estuarine/Marine

Invertebrate 

Acute Toxicity 

44946310 Acceptable

Acceptable

No --
24

OCSPP Guideline Data 

requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

MRID

Study 

Classifications

Data Gap? Comments

850.1075 Freshwater Fish 

Acute Toxicity

44946239

44946301

Supplemental

Acceptable

No Endpoints for rainbow trout 

study show toxicity effects 

despite low mean-measured 

concentrations and these 

endpoints are valid for risk 

assessment. 

850.1075 Estuarine/Marine 

Fish Acute 

Toxicity

44946314 Acceptable No --

850.1300 Freshwater 

Invertebrate Life 

Cycle

44946313 Acceptable No --

850.1350 Estuarine/Marine

Invertebrate Life 

Cycle

44946315 Acceptable No --

850.1400 Freshwater Fish 

Early-Life Stage

44946312 Acceptable No --

850.1400 Estuarine/Marine

Fish Early-Life 

Stage

44946309 Acceptable No --

Non-Guideline Whole sediment: 

chronic 

invertebrates 

freshwater and 

marine

44946308 Supplemental Yes A chronic sediment tests with the 

midge Chironomus dilutes has been 

provided but endpoints are not valid

to quantitatively assess risk because 

of questions surrounding the 

concentrations of famoxadone in 

sediment; studies with the midge 

Chironomus dilutes and freshwater 

amphipod Hyalella azteca and the 

estuarine/ marine amphipod 

Leptocheirus plumulosus are

requested because :

i. The estimated environmental 

concentration (EEC) in sediment 

is > 0.1 of the acute LC50/EC50 

values;

ii. The half-life of the pesticide in 

sediment isf > 10 days in either 

the aerobic soil or aquatic 

metabolism studies and if any of 

the following exist:

• The soil partition coefficient 

(Kd) is ≥ 50

• The log Kow is ≥ 3, or

• The Koc is ≥ 1,000
25

OCSPP Guideline Data 

requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

MRID

Study 

Classifications

Data Gap? Comments

Aerobic soil metabolism studies 

measured a maximum half-life of 

38.3 days in sandy loam soil (MRID 

44946339). Modeling via 

PRZM/EXAMS (D349252) indicates 

aquatic EECs of at least 1.609 μg/L 

which is approximately 0.13 of the 

LC50 of 11.8 μg/L for D. magna 

(MRID 44946307); the log Kow and 

Koc of famoxadone are 4.65 and 

3307-4030 mL/g, respectively. 

850.1500 Fish Life-Cycle 44946314 Acceptable No --

850.4400 Aquatic Plant 

Toxicity Test 

using Lemna spp. 

44946320 Acceptable No --

850.4500 Algal Toxicity 44946321

44946323

44946322

Acceptable

Acceptable

Acceptable

No --

850.4550 Cyanobacteria 44946324 Acceptable No --

Table 9: Data Gaps based on submitted Terrestrial Effects Data for Famoxadone

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data 

requirement

Submitted 

Studies

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Data 

Gap?

Comments

850.2100 Avian Acute Oral 

Toxicity (Upland 

game or 

waterfowl 

species)

44946232 Acceptable No --

850.2100 Avian Acute Oral 

Toxicity 

(Passerine 

species)

(none) NA Yes Measures of effect from a nonpasserine species could potentially 

underestimate famoxadone

toxicity to passerine species, 

consequently, additional 

information on famoxadone

toxicity to a passerine species is 

needed to reduce the uncertainty 

created by this analysis. These 

studies are now required under 

the most recent 40 CFR Part 158

850.2200 Avian Dietary 

Toxicity

44946234

44946233

Acceptable

Acceptable

No --
26

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data 

requirement

Submitted 

Studies

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Data 

Gap?

Comments

850.2300 Avian 

Reproduction

44946235

44946237

Acceptable

Acceptable

No --

850.3020 Honey Bee Acute 

Adult Contact 

Toxicity

44946326 Acceptable No --

NonGuideline 

(OECD 213)

Tier I- Honeybee 

Acute Adult Oral 

Toxicity

44946325 Supplemental Yes The study was classified as 

supplemental, but the endpoints 

may only be used to qualitatively

assess risk because famoxadone 

concentrations in the food were 

not measured after mixing. The 

highest test concentrations (1000 

mg/L) were well above the limit of 

solubility (49 μg/L) for this 

chemical. 

NonGuidelineTier I-Honeybee 

Adult Chronic 

Oral Exposure

(none) NA Yes This study estimates the exposure 

to adult bees resulting from visits 

to contaminated flowers over an 

extended period of time or 

through consumption of 

contaminated food in the hive. 

NonGuidelineTier I- Honeybee 

Larval Chronic 

Exposure 

(none) NA Yes This study helps characterize the 

effects of repeated exposure of 

the brood to pesticides that may 

enter the hive and be stored in 

food sources such as pollen, 

honey, royal or brood jelly. 

NonGuidelineTier I- Honeybee 

Larval Acute 

Exposure 

(none) NA Yes This study helps characterize the 

effect of acute exposure of the 

brood to pesticides that may enter 

the hive and be stored in food 

sources such as pollen, honey, 

royal or brood jelly. 

850.3030 Honey Bee 

Residue on 

Foliage

46350403 Supplemental No This study was carried out using 

the TEP 

NonGuidelineSemi-Field 

Testing for 

Honeybees

(none) NA Yes If risks are identified from Tier I 

risk estimation for honeybees, 

then Tier II risk estimations may 

need to be called in to identify 

more targeted risk mitigation 

options

850.3040 Field Testing for 

Pollinators

(none) NA Yes If risks are identified from Tier I 

risk estimation for honeybees, 
27

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data 

requirement

Submitted 

Studies

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Data 

Gap?

Comments

then Tier II risk estimations may 

need to be called in to identify 

more targeted risk mitigation 

options

850.4100 Seedling 

Emergence and 

Seedling Growth 

44946319 Acceptable No --

850.4150 Vegetative Vigor 44946319 Acceptable No --

The following studies shown in Table 10 were recently submitted by the Registrant and are currently 

under review. These compare the toxicity of famoxadone to that of its major degradate compounds in 

Daphnia magna. If these studies are found not to be scientifically valid and do not meet OSCPP guideline 

requirements, then they will be treated as data gaps. 

Table 10: Data Gaps for Famoxadone Degradates

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data requirement Submitte

d Studies

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Data 

Gap?

Comments

850.1075 Acute Toxicity to 

Freshwater Fish INJS490

44946306 Supplemental No --

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-JL856-1 to 

Daphnia magna

44946305 Supplemental No Non-guideline- tested to onetenth of the solubility limit. 

Endpoints can be only be used to 

compare degradate toxicity to 

that of parent.

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-JL856-1 to 

Daphnia magna

In Review In Review Yes

These studies have been 

submitted to the Agency for 

review. If they are found not to be 

scientifically sound, they will be 

considered data gaps.

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-MN468-0 to 

Daphnia magna

In Review In Review Yes

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-KF015 to Daphnia 

magna

In Review In Review Yes

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-H3310 to Daphnia 

magna

In Review In Review Yes

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-KZ007 to Daphnia 

magna

(none) NA Yes Major degradate- Observed in 

aerobic soil metabolism study 

(MRID 44946339) up to 16.2% 

after 4 days, degrades to 9.8% 

after 118 days.
28

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data requirement Submitte

d Studies

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Data 

Gap?

Comments

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-MN467 to 

Daphnia magna

(none) NA Yes Major degradate- Observed in 

photolysis study (MRID 44946338) 

up to 18.3% after 7 days, degrades 

to 10.2% after 15 days.

850.1010 48-Hour Limit Test of 

IN-MN968 to 

Daphnia magna

(none) NA Yes Major degradate- Observed in 

hydrolysis study (MRID 44946336) 

up to 39.9% AR after 4 hours. 

Explanations for non-guideline data requirements are below: 

Study Title: Whole Sediment: Chronic Invertebrates-Freshwater and Marine

Rationale for Requiring the Data

No chronic sediment toxicity tests for freshwater or marine invertebrates have been submitted to 

satisfy the Agency’s updated data requirements for outdoor uses in 40 CFR Part 158 (October 26, 

2007). Benthic organisms may be exposed to run-off or spray drift from applications used in 

terrestrial uses. Chronic sediment invertebrate toxicity data are required if:

i. The estimated environmental concentration (EEC) in sediment is > 0.1 of the acute 

LC50/EC50 values;

ii. The half-life of the pesticide in sediment is > 10 days in either the aerobic soil or 

aquatic metabolism studies and if any of the following exist:

• The soil partition coefficient (Kd) is ≥ 50

• The log Kow is ≥ 3, or

• The Koc is ≥ 1,000

Aerobic soil metabolism studies measured a maximum half-life of 38.3 days in sandy loam soil (MRID 

44946339). Modeling via PRZM/EXAMS (D349252) indicates aquatic EECs of at least 1.609 μg/L which 

is approximately 0.13 of the LC50 of 11.8 μg/L for D. magna (MRID 44946307); the log Kow and Koc 

of famoxadone are 4.65 and 3307-4030 mL/g, respectively. Chronic sediment tests with the midge 

Chironomus dilutes has been provided, but endpoints are not valid to quantitatively assess risk 

because of questions surrounding the concentrations of famoxadone in sediment; A follow up study 

has been requested and is due on 6/30/2015. Studies with the freshwater amphipod Hyalella azteca

and the estuarine/marine amphipod Leptocheirus plumulosus are needed. General information and 

overall guidance is available in the OPPTS 850.1000 guideline1. 

In some situations, a tiered testing strategy may be considered for requesting chronic sediment 

toxicity testing. In this approach, sediment toxicity testing would first be conducted with the 

aforementioned species using the subchronic (10-d) sediment toxicity test guidelines (OSCPP 

850.1735 and 850.1740). Then, pending a comparison of estimated environmental concentrations 

(EEC) in sediment and pore water with toxicity results from the 10-d sediment toxicity studies, the 

need for one or more chronic sediment toxicity studies would be determined. This tiered testing 

approach has the potential advantage of reducing the number of chronic (life cycle) studies that 

would be needed when results of the 10-d (subchronic) tests in conjunction with sediment EECs 
29

indicate chronic testing is not likely to alter risk assessment conclusions. In some cases, however, this 

tiered testing approach may result in the conduct of both a 10-d (subchronic) and a chronic (life 

cycle) study. 

Practical Utility of the Data

How will the data be used?

The objective of a sediment test is to determine whether chemicals in sediment are harmful to or are

bioaccumulated by benthic organisms. The tests can be used to measure interactive toxic effects of 

complex chemical mixtures in sediment. These data are used to determine definitive NOEC and LOEC 

values (typically normalized to organic carbon content for organic test substances) for survival, 

growth and reproduction of technical grade active ingredient (TGAI) to freshwater midges, 

freshwater amphipods and estuarine/marine amphipods. Data obtained from this study will be used 

in characterizing risk to sediment-dwelling aquatic invertebrates from chronic exposure of 

famoxadone. 

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision-making?

If the data indicates that registered famoxadone uses may pose a risk of adverse effects to nontarget benthic organisms above the Agency Level of Concern, the Agency may explore decision 

options to mitigate this risk. The lack of these data will limit the flexibility the Agency and registrants 

have in coming into compliance with the Endangered Species Act, and could result in use restrictions 

for famoxadone which may otherwise be avoided, or which are unnecessarily severe.

[1]http://www.epa.gov/opptsmnt/pubs/frs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/850_Ecological_Effects_Test_Guidelines/Drafts/850-1000.pdf

Study Title: Tier I-Honeybee Adult Acute Oral Toxicity

Rationale for Requiring the Data

Bees can be exposed to pesticides through multiple pathways including contact with sprays and 

dusts and through ingestion of residues in food/water (e.g., pollen/nectar and water used to 

maintain colony temperature). Based on the recommended application methods for famoxadone, 

worker bees foraging on flowers for pollen and nectar can be exposed to residues in pollen and 

nectar through direct contamination of these matrices by ground sprayer, aerial equipment and 

chemigation (USEPA, 2014d.). EPA guidance1 on assessing the risk of pesticides to bees identifies a 

suite of laboratory-based studies intended that serve as the foundation for screening chemical for 

potential acute and chronic effects to individual adult and larval bees. The acute oral toxicity study 

with adult bees provides median lethal dose (LD50) value for honeybees (A. mellifera) based on 

potential routes of acute oral exposure.

Practical Utility of the Data

How will the data be used?

These data are used in conjunction with acute contact LD50 data obtained through OCSPP 850.3020 

to estimate the acute toxicity of technical grade active ingredient (TGAI) to individual young adult 

honeybees. The studies also provide slopes for the dose-response curves that can in turn be used for 

estimating the likelihood of individual effects and sublethal effects observed in the study will be used 

to further characterize effects observed following a single exposure to the technical grade material. 

Data obtained from this study will be used in estimating acute risk to individual adult bees. 

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision-making?

In the absence of these data, honeybee oral toxicity data for surrogate pesticides – starting with data 

for closely related pesticides and proceeding to data for less related pesticides – may be used to 
30

characterize the oral toxicity of famoxadone to honeybees. Risk estimates based on these data will 

be considered along with other lines of evidence to determine whether higher-tier studies are 

needed at the whole colony level.

[1] USEPA. 1996. Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS 860.1900 Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops. EPA 712-C-96-189.

file:///C:/Users/tsteeger/Downloads/EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0155-0019.pdf (last accessed 06/01/2104)

Study Title: Tier I- Adult Honey Bee Chronic Oral Toxicity

Rationale for Requiring the Data

Bees can be exposed to pesticides through multiple pathways including long term ingestion of 

residues in food/water (e.g., pollen/nectar and water used to maintain colony temperature). Worker 

bees foraging on flowers for pollen and nectar can be repeatedly exposed to residues in pollen and 

nectar through direct contamination of these matrices by foliar sprays. Residues can in turn be 

brought back to bee colonies where in-hive bees including young adult and developing brood (i.e., 

eggs, larvae and pupae) may be exposed. EPA guidance1 on assessing the risk of pesticides to bees 

identifies a suite of laboratory-based studies intended that serve as the foundation for screening 

chemical for potential chronic effects to individual adult bees. The chronic oral toxicity study with 

adult bees provides 10-day toxicity no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) and lowest-observed 

adverse effect level (LOAEL) for assessing chronic effects to honey bees (A. mellifera) based on 

potential routes of chronic oral exposure.

Practical Utility of the Data

How will the data be used?

Data obtained from this study will be used in estimating chronic risk to individual adult bees. This is 

a non-guideline study; an OECD protocol is expected to be available in late 2014. A protocol should 

be submitted to the Agency for review before commencing the study and should include provisions 

for measuring the concentration of famoxadone in the actual diet of the honeybee.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision-making?

In the absence of these data, honey bee oral toxicity data for surrogate pesticides – starting with 

data for closely related pesticides and proceeding to data for less related pesticides – may be used to 

characterize the chronic toxicity of famoxadone to honey bees. Risk estimates based on these data 

will be considered along with other lines of evidence to determine whether higher-tier studies are 

needed at the whole colony level.

[1] USEPA. 1996. Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS 860.1900 Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops. EPA 712-C-96-189.

file:///C:/Users/tsteeger/Downloads/EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0155-0019.pdf (last accessed 06/01/2104)

Study Title: Tier 1- Larval Honeybee Acute and Chronic Oral Exposure

Rationale for Requiring the Data

Developing bee brood (i.e., larvae and pupae) can be exposed to pesticides through residues brought 

back to the colony by worker bees foraging in areas where the pesticide has been applied. While 

larvae are typically fed royal or brood jelly during their early stages of development, worker bee 

(females) and drone (males) larvae are also fed pollen/honey (bee bread) directly by in-hive nurse 

bees. EPA guidance (USEPA 2014) on assessing the risk of pesticides to bees identifies a suite of 

laboratory-based studies intended that serve as the foundation for screening chemical for potential 

acute and chronic effects to individual adult and larval bees. 
31

Practical Utility of the Data

How will the data be used?

The 21-day larval toxicity study1 under development by OECD provides both acute and chronic 

toxicity data on developing bee brood and will yield a median lethal dose (LD50) for assessing acute 

toxicity during the early part of the study as well as a 21-day no-observed adverse effect level 

(NOAEL) and lowest-observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) for assessing chronic effects. 

Alternatively, registrants may submit a separate acute (single dose) larval toxicity study following 

OECD Guideline 2372 as well as the 21-day repeat dose chronic toxicity study to address both acute 

and chronic larval endpoints. Effects on survival and development (adult bee emergence) from 

repeat exposures to the active ingredient will be used in estimating chronic risk to individual brood. 

A protocol for the 21-day larval toxicity test should be submitted to the Agency for review before 

commencing the study and should include provisions for measuring the concentration of 

famoxadone in the actual diet of the honeybee.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision-making?

Effects on survival and development from repeat exposures to the active ingredient will be used in 

estimating acute and chronic risk to individual brood. Risk estimates based on these data will be 

considered along with other lines of evidence to determine whether higher-tier studies are needed 

at the whole colony level.

[1] Draft guidance for the 21-day larval toxicity study is available at: 

http://www.oecd.org/env/ehs/testing/Draft_GD_honeybees_rep_exp_for_2nd_CR_25_November_2013.pdf

[2] OECD Guideline 237 is available at: http://www.oecdilibrary.org/docserver/download/9713171e.pdf?expires=1407449911&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=E67BEDEB01DB12D815E858CB45A9

89FB

Study Title: Pollinator Tier II Semi-Field Toxicity Testing (tunnel/enclosure studies)

Rationale for Requiring the Data

Tier II studies are conditional on the outcome of the screening-level assessment where acute and/or 

chronic risk levels of concern have been exceeded for terrestrial invertebrates. Terrestrial 

invertebrates are likely to be impacted if exposed to pesticides in various use settings. Pesticide 

residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently brought back 

to the hive and may adversely affect developing brood (egg, larvae, and pupae) and adult bees. 

Screening-level (Tier I) studies of individual bees do not address possible effects and/or exposure to 

pesticide residues at the colony-level. Because of the potential for pollen and nectar to be 

contaminated with pesticide residues, and subsequently brought back to the hive, it is important to 

determine whether bee colonies may be negatively affected under relatively controlled exposure 

conditions of a semi-field study. In addition to providing effects data, these studies can provide data 

on exposure as pesticide residues in pollen/nectar of treated plants.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for 

invertebrates with the honeybee. The guidance describes the tiered testing process and can be 

found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator-protection/pollinator-risk-assessment-guidance . 

Additional information on honeybee colony studies under semi-field conditions can be found in the 

OECD Guidance 75 

http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=env/jm/mono%28 .

Practical Utility of the Data
32

How will the data be used?

Tier II colony-level data will be used to assess potential risk to non-target organisms including listed 

and non-listed terrestrial social invertebrate species and to determine whether effects observed in 

the screening-level (Tier I) laboratory-based studies of individual bees are evident in colony-level 

studies under semi-field conditions. The Tier II semi-field test of whole colonies is a relatively 

controlled study, i.e., bees are confined to a specific area, that is designed to represent potential 

field-level exposure and account for hive dynamics, which are not achievable from other pollinator 

studies. This study will be used to determine whether adverse effects to insect pollinators at the 

whole colony level, may result for the use of pesticides and will help to refine risk estimates derived 

in the screening-level risk assessment for beneficial terrestrial invertebrates. Measured residues in 

pollen/nectar can also be used to refine risk estimates derived from model-based or default values in 

the screening-level assessment.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision-making?

The data will inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continued 

registration of a pesticide is likely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non-target species or is 

likely to adversely affect federally listed threatened or endangered species or their designated 

critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of 

pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in significant use restrictions.

Study Title: Pollinator Tier II Semi-Field Toxicity Testing (feeding studies)

Rationale for Requiring the Data

Pesticide residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently 

brought back to the hive, and may adversely affect developing brood (egg, larvae, and pupae) and

adult bees. Tier II feeding studies are conditional on the outcome of the screening-level assessment 

where acute and/or chronic risk levels of concern have been exceeded for terrestrial invertebrates 

based on Tier I studies of individual bees. Feeding studies utilize free foraging bee colonies that are 

“dosed” with specific quantities of test material and represent a means of ensuring exposure to the 

test material through spiked pollen and/or sugar solutions fed to the colony while still allowing the 

bees to forage freely. Since bee colonies are not confined to enclosures, colonies can be exposed for 

longer duration periods without subjecting the bees to stress that typically results from Tier II tunnel 

studies. Available toxicity studies of individual bees (Tier 1) conducted to support screening-level 

assessments do not address possible effects and/or exposure to pesticide residues at the colonylevel. Because of the potential for pollen and nectar to be contaminated with pesticide residues, and 

subsequently brought back to the hive, it is important to determine whether bee colonies may be 

negatively affected where bees are free foraging and have the option to collect/consume alternative 

forage items beyond the spiked food. Since multiple dose levels can be more readily tested, feeding 

studies can help to define dose-response relationships at the whole colony level.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for 

invertebrates with the honeybee. The guidance describes the tiered testing process and can be 

found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator-protection/pollinator-risk-assessment-guidance . 

Additional information on honeybee colony feeding studies can be found in the EPPO Guidance 170 

at: http://www.nationalbeeunit.com/index.cfm?pageId=187.
33

Practical Utility of the Data

How will the data be used?

Tier II colony feeding data will be used to assess potential risk to non-target organisms including 

listed and non-listed terrestrial social invertebrate species. The colony feeding study is designed to 

represent potential field-level exposure and account for hive dynamics using longer duration 

exposure periods than are possible in Tier II tunnel studies. The study will be used to determine 

whether potential adverse effects to insect pollinators at the whole colony level when bees are able 

to forage naturally beyond the spiked food. Results from the feeding study will help to refine the 

screening-level risk assessment for beneficial terrestrial invertebrates that were based on Tier I 

studies on individual bees. Since feeding studies can help to define a dose-response relationship at 

the colony level, the studies can provide a means of determining exposure thresholds below which 

the likelihood of adverse effects on colonies may be low.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision-making?

Tier II colony-level data will be used to refine screening-level risk estimates derived using Tier I 

laboratory-based data on individual bees. The Tier II data will inform the determination required 

under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continued registration of a pesticide is likely to result in 

unreasonable adverse effects to non-target species or is likely to adversely affect federally listed 

threatened or endangered species or their designated critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may 

need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and

the ESA, and could result in significant use restrictions.

Study Title: Tier II Nectar and Pollen Residue Study for Insect Pollinators

Rationale for Requiring the Data

Bees can be exposed to pesticides through multiple pathways including direct contact with sprays 

and dusts and through ingestion of residues in food/water (e.g., pollen/nectar and water used to 

maintain colony temperature). Worker bees foraging on flowers for pollen and nectar can be 

exposed to residues in pollen and nectar that is translocated from ground application. Famoxadone 

may be translocated to flowers and nectar. These residues can in turn be brought back to bee 

colonies where in-hive bees including young adult and developing brood (i.e., eggs, larvae and 

pupae) may be exposed. EPA guidance on assessing the risk of pesticides to bees identifies a tiered 

process where the initial screen is based on a suite of acute and chronic laboratory studies individual 

adult bees and larvae. If screening-level assessment indicates potential chronic risks to individual 

bees, then higher-tier studies may be required to examine potential routes of exposure at the colony 

level. Famoxadone is a fungicide that is applied pre and port-emergence to control fungal pathogens 

on crops such as caneberries that rely on foraging insect pollinators, so there is a possibility of 

exposure to translocated residues in nectar and pollen. 

Practical Utility of the Data

How will the data be used?

Acute tests with adult bees have indicated that the active ingredient is moderately toxic to bees on 

an acute contact exposure basis. If toxicity effects are observed in individual larval or adult bees from 

acute or chronic exposure, nectar and pollen residue studies will determine if translocation is a 

possible route of exposure to insect pollinators and their colonies.
34

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision-making?

Exposure estimates based on these data will be considered along with other lines of evidence to 

characterize the risk picture of famoxadone to foraging insect pollinators and whether Tier III studies 

are needed. 

12. References

Andrieu, N., Jaworska, G., Genet, J.L., Bompeix, G. 2001. Biological mode of action of Famoxadone on 

Plasmopara viticola and Phytophthora infestans. Crop Protection 20: 253-260. 

Brown, M.R., 1998. Static-Renewal, Acute, 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-JL856-1 to Daphnia magna. E. I. du 

Pont de Nemours and Company HLR 382-96 (9 May, 96), unpublished.

Brown, M.R., 1998. Flow-Through, Acute, 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-MN468-0 to Daphnia magna. E. I. du 

Pont de Nemours and Company HLR 848-96 (9 May, 96), unpublished.

Brown, M.R., 1998. Static, Acute, 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-H3310 2 to Daphnia magna E. I. du Pont de 

Nemours and Company HLR 380-96 (5 Sep, 96), unpublished.

Brown, M.R., 1998. Static, Acute, 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-JS940 1 to Daphnia magna. E. I. du Pont de 

Nemours and Company HLR 381-96 (22 Jul, 96), unpublished.

Brown, M.R., 1998. Acute Limit Toxicity Test with KF015 and the Daphnid, Daphnia magna. T.R. Wilbury 

Laboratories, Inc. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company AMR 3978-96 (9 Sep, 96), unpublished

USEPA. 2003. Famoxadone - Health Effects Division (HED) Metabolism Assessment Review

Committee (MARC) Decision Document. DP Barcode D288134.

USEPA. 2008. Tier II Drinking Water Exposure Assessment for Famoxadone Use on Leafy Greens 

subgroup 4A, Bulb Vegetables Group 3, Cilantro and Caneberry subgroup 13A and Leaf Petioles 

subgroup 4B. April 30, 2008. (D347671, D347674).

USEPA. 2014a. Famoxadone (113202) EFED label data report, BEAD 10/17/2014.

USEPA. 2014b. Famoxadone (113202): Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA). Biological and Economic 

Analysis Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. June 17, 2014.

USEPA. 2014c. Famoxadone (113202): BEAD Chemical Profile for Registration Review: Famoxadone 

(113202).

USEPA. 2014d. Screening level Usage Analysis (SLUA), June 2014. 
35

Appendix A. Chemical Identity of Famoxadone and Its Degradation Products

Code Name/ 

Synonym

Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type MRID

Maximum %AR 

(day)

Final %AR (study 

length)

PARENT

Famoxadone

(DPX-JE874)

CAS Name: 3-anilo-5-

methyl-5-(4-

phenoxyphenyl)-1,3-

oxazolidine-2,4-dione

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Smiles 

CC1(C(=O)N(C(=O)O1)NC2=

CC=CC=C2)C3=CC=C(C=C3)O

C4=CC=CC=C4

Hydrolysis pH 4 at 25oC

44946336

52.3 (30 days)

Hydrolysis pH 7 at 25oC 18 (5 days)

Hydrolysis pH 9 at 25oC 8.3 (5 hours)

Photolysis 44946338 5.7 (15 days)

Aerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism 

44946405 0.4 (30 days)

Anaerobic Soil 

Metabolism

44946404 4.8 (120 days) 

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44946402 11.2 (174 days)

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44946339 4.2 (118 days) 

DEGRADATES

IN-KZ007 CAS Name: 5-[4-(4-

hydroxyphenoxy)phenyl]-5-

methyl-3-(phenylamino)-

2,4-oxazolidinedione

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Water

44946405 5.5 (4 days) 0.1 (21 days) 

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Sediment

44946405 5.7 (7 days) 3.4 (21 days) 

Anaerobic Soil 

Metabolism

44946404 3.7 (0 days) 1.1 (120 days) 

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44946402 6.3 (4 days) 0.3 (174 days) 
36

Code Name/ 

Synonym

Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type MRID

Maximum %AR 

(day)

Final %AR (study 

length)

Smiles: 

CC1(C(=O)N(C(=O)O1)Nc2cc

ccc2)c3ccc(cc3)Oc4ccc(cc4)

O

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44946339 16.2 (4 days) 9.8 (118 days)

IN-MN467 CAS Name: 5-methyl-3-[(2-

nitrophenyl)amino]-5-(4-

phenoxyphenyl)-2,4-

oxazolidinedione

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Smiles: 

CC1(C(=O)N(C(=O)O1)Nc2cc

ccc2[N+](=O)[O-

])c3ccc(cc3)Oc4ccccc4

Photolysis 44946338 18.3 (7 days) 10.2 (15 days) 

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44946402 1.7 (174 days) 1.7 (174 days) 

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44946339 8.8 (30 days) 3.1 (118 days)

IN-MN468 CAS Name: (5-methyl-3-[(4-

nitrophenyl)amino]-5-(4-

phenoxyphenyl)-2,4-

oxazolidinedione)

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Photolysis 44946338 13.4 (15 days) 13.4 (15 days) 
37

Code Name/ 

Synonym

Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type MRID

Maximum %AR 

(day)

Final %AR (study 

length)

Smiles: 

CC1(C(=O)N(C(=O)O1)Nc2cc

c(cc2)[N+](=O)[O-

])c3ccc(cc3)Oc4ccccc4

IN-JL856 CAS Name: α-hydroxy-αmethyl-4-

phenoxybenzeneacetic 

acid-2-phenylhydrazide

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Smiles: 

CC(c1ccc(cc1)Oc2ccccc2)(C(

=O)NNc3ccccc3)O

Hydrolysis pH 4 at 25oC 44946336 5.0 (30 days) 5.0 (30 days)

Hydrolysis pH 7 at 25oC 14.1 (5 days) 14.1 (5 days)

Hydrolysis pH 9 at 25oC 20.4 (5 hours) 20.4 (5 hours) 

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Water

44946405 5.5 (4 days) 0.1 (21 days) 

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Sediment

44946405 5.5 (4 days) 3.1 (21 days) 

Photolysis pH 5 44946337 11.0 (6 days) 11 (6 days) 

IN-KF015 CAS Name: 5-methyl-5-(4-

phenoxyphenyl)-2,4-

oxazolidinedione)

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Smiles: 

CC1(C(=O)NC(=O)O1)c2ccc(

cc2)Oc3ccccc3

Photolysis 44946338 21.5 (1 day) 6.3 (15 days) 

Photolysis pH 5 44946337 11.0 (6 days) 11.0 (6 days) 
38

Code Name/ 

Synonym

Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type MRID

Maximum %AR 

(day)

Final %AR (study 

length)

IN-JS940 CAS Name: (α-hydroxy-αmethyl-4-

phenoxybenzeneacetic 

acid)

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Smiles:

CC(c1ccc(cc1)Oc2ccccc2)(C(

=O)O)O

Hydrolysis pH 4 at 25oC 44946336 30.5 (30 days) 30.5 (30 days)

Hydrolysis pH 7 at 25oC 51.7 (5 days) 51.7 (5 days)

Hydrolysis pH 9 at 25oC 19.8 (5 hours) 19.8 (5 hours)

Soil Photolysis 44946338 6.9 (15 days) 6.9 (15 days)

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Water

44946405 20.5 (3 days) 0.5 (21 days) 

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Sediment

44946405 6.5 (2 days) 2.7 (21 days) 

Soil Photolysis pH 5 44946337 21.7 (6 days) 21.7 (6 days) 

Anaerobic Soil 

Metabolism

44946404 13.9 (91 days) 9.6 (120 days) 

Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44946402 3.7 (6 days) 0.5 (174 days) 

mAerobic Soil Metabolism 44946339 4.7 (30 days) 3.1 (118 days)

IN-H3310 CAS Name: (1-(4-

phenoxyphenyl)ethanone)

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Hydrolysis pH 4 at 25oC 44946336 2.9 (30 days) 2.9 (30 days)

Hydrolysis pH 7 at 25oC 11.9 (2 days) 11.7 (5 days)

Hydrolysis pH 9 at 25oC 0.6 (5 hours) 0.6 (5 hours)

Soil Photolysis 44946338 26.6 (10 days) 21.9 (15 days) 

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Water

44946405 2.4 (0.25 days) 0.1 (21 days)
39

Code Name/ 

Synonym

Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type MRID

Maximum %AR 

(day)

Final %AR (study 

length)

Smiles:

CC(=O)c1ccc(cc1)Oc2ccccc2

Aerobic Aquatic Met. 

Sediment

44946405 10.7 (7 days) 2.8 (21 days) 

Soil Photolysis pH 5 44946337 39.3 (6 days) 39.3 (6 days) 

Anaerobic Soil 

Metabolism

44946404 3.4 (91 days) 1.9 (120 days) 

IN-MN968 CAS Name: 

CAS Number:

Formula

MW: 

Smiles: 

Hydrolysis pH 4 at 25oC 44946336 0 0

Hydrolysis pH 7 at 25oC 0 0

Hydrolysis pH 9 at 25oC 39.3 (4 hours) 38.1 (5 hours) 
40

Appendix B: A Summary of the Registered Uses of Famoxadone

Use Product Name Reg No Method of 

Application

Maximum 

Single

Application 

Rate (lb 

famoxadone

/A) (min 

application 

interval)

Max Annual 

Application 

Rate (lb 

famoxadone/A)

Bulb Vegetables Tanos1 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

8 apps at 

0.156 (5 days)2

1.3125

Bulb Onion 

(subgroup 3-07 

A): 

Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

8 apps at 

0.156 (5 days)3

1.3125

Caneberries, 

(subgroup 13-07 

A)

Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

7 apps at 

0.156 (5 days)

1.125

Cucurbit 

Vegetables: 

Cantaloupe, 

Cucumber, 

Honeydew Melon, 

Muskmelon, 

Watermelon, 

Pumpkin, Summer 

Squash, Winter 

Squash, and other 

Cucurbits

Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

9 apps at 

0.125 (5 days)4

1.125

Grapes* (East of 

the Rocky 

Mountains)

Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

9 apps at 

0.125 (10 

days)

1.125
41

broadcast, 

Chemigation

Hops Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

6 apps at 

0.125 (6 days)

0.75

Leafy Vegetables 

(except Brassica), 

group 4: Leafy 

greens subgroup 

4A: 

Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

Maximum 

annual 

number of 

applications 8 

apps at 0.156 

(5-days)

1.248

Spinach; Spinach, 

New Zealand; 

Spinach, vine

Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

Number of 

applications 

per cropping 

cycle (year)- 8 

apps at 0.156 

(5 days)2

1.3125

Peppers (all 

varieties of 

peppers) 

including: 

pimentos and bell, 

hot, and sweet 

peppers

Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

7 apps at 

0.156 (5 days)

1.125

Potatoes Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

9 apps at 

0.125 (7 days)

1.125

Tomatoes Tanos 352-604 Ground 

broadcast, 

aerial 

broadcast, 

Chemigation

9 apps at 

0.125 (5 days)

1.125

Fungicide 

manufacturing

Famoxadone 

Technical

352-605 N/AX N/A N/A

1 Product is not registered in CA (for any uses)

2Communication with the registrant is currently ongoing with regard to the maximum number of 

annual applications of famoxadone to spinach. The label currently lists the number of applications in 

terms of cropping cycles, and there may be more than one cropping cycle per season for these crops 

depending on the geographic region. 
42

Appendix C: Previous Actions and Assessed Uses for Famoxadone 

Use Site Max. Application Rate 

(lb ai/A)

Number of 

applications 

(Application 

Interval in 

Days)

Action/DP Barcode/Date

Single 

(App Method)

Seasonal/ 

Annual

Leafy Greens

(subgroup 4a)

Bulb Veg.

(group 3), 

Cilantro

Cranberry

(subgroup 13a)

Leafy Petioles

(subgroup 4b)

0.156 (F)

0.156 (F)

0.156 (F)

0.156 (F)

0.75

1.3125

1.125

0.75

4 (NS)*

8 (NS)*

8 (NS)*

4 (NS)*

Section 3- New Use

D349252

6/30/2008

Leafy Greens

(subgroup 4a)

Bulb Veg.

(group 3), Cilantro

Caneberry 

(subgroup 13a)

Leafy Petioles

(subgroup 4b)

0.156 (F)

0.156 (F)

0.156 (F)

0.156 (F)

0.75

1.3125

1.125

0.75

4 (NS)*

8 (NS)*

8 (NS)*

4 (NS)*

Tier II DWA

D347671, D347674

4/30/2008

Grapes,

Hops,

Caneberries

0.125

0.156

0.1875

0.375

0.468

1.125 per crop 

cycle

3

3

6 (5-7)

Section 3- New Use

D331970

12/29/2006

Grapes,

Hops,

Caneberries

0.125

0.156

0.1875

0.375

0.468

1.125 per crop 

cycle

3

3

6 (5-7)

Tier II DWA

D323683, D331970

12/6/2006

Soybean 0.05-0.065 (A, 

G)

0.13 2 (14-21) Section 18-Emergency 

Exemption 

Minnesota, S. Dakota

D319075

12/12/2005

Soybean 0.05-0.065 (A, 0.13 2 (14-21) Section 18-Emergency 
43

G) Exemption DWA

Minnesota, S. Dakota

D321060

8/31/2005

Cucurbits

Head Lettuce

Potatoes

Fruiting Veg.

0.1875 (A) 1.125 6 (5) Section 3- New Uses

D276071, D285923

3/25/2003

Potatoes, Fruiting 

Vegetables, 

Curcurbit

Vegetables, Head 

Lettuce

0.1875 1.125 6 (5) Tier II DWA

D286872

1/10/2003

Potatoes, Fruiting 

Vegetables, 

Curcurbit 

Vegetables, Head 

Lettuce

0.1875 1.125 6 (5) Tier II DWA

D286872

12/13/2002

*Value is assumed.

N/A= Not applicable, NS = Not specified, DWA = Drinking Water Assessment

G = ground, A = aerial
44

Appendix D: Inputs and Outputs from SIP Program

Table 1. Inputs

Parameter Value

Chemical name

Solubility (in water at 25oC; mg/L) 0.52

Mammalian LD50 (mg/kg-bw) 5000

Mammalian test species laboratory rat

Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian 

species

Mammalian NOAEL (mg/kg-bw) 200

Mammalian test species laboratory rat

Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian 

species

Avian LD50 (mg/kg-bw) 2250

Avian test species northern bobwhite quail

Body weight (g) of "other" avian species

Mineau scaling factor 1.15

Mallard NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 5620

Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 2250

NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for other bird species

Body weight (g) of other avian species

NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for 2nd other bird 

species

Body weight (g) of 2nd other avian species

Parameter Acute Chronic

Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 0.0894 0.0894

Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 3845.8028 153.8321

Ratio of exposure to toxicity 0.0000 0.0006

Conclusion*

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for mammals

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for mammals

Table 3. Avian Results

Parameter Acute Chronic

Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 0.4212 0.4212

Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 1620.9664 239.1712

Ratio of exposure to acute toxicity 0.0003 0.0018

Conclusion*

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for birds

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for birds

*Conclusion is for drinking water exposure alone. This does not combine all routes of exposure. 

Therefore, when aggregated with other routes (i.e., diet, inhalation, dermal), pesticide exposure through 

drinking water may contribute to a total exposure that has potential for effects to non-target animals.
45

Appendix E: Inputs and Outputs from STIR Program

Input

Application and Chemical Information

Enter Chemical Name Famoxadone

Enter Chemical Use Fungicide

Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) y

If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) ground

Enter Chemical Molecular Weight (g/mole) 374.4

Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 4.80E-09

Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 1.35

Toxicity Properties

Bird

Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD50 (mg/kg bw) 2250

Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15

Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 0.178

Mammal

Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD50 (mg/kg bw) 5000

Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC50 (mg/L) 5.3

Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4

Enter Rat Weight (kg) 200

Output

Results Avian (0.020 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation 

(mg/m3) 9.67E-05

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.22E-05

Adjusted Inhalation LD50 2.33E-02

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 5.22E-04 Exposure not Likely Significant

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.43E-01

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation 

LD50 6.13E+00 Proceed to Refinements

Results Mammalian (0.015 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation 

(mg/m3) 9.67E-05

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.53E-05

Adjusted Inhalation LD50 2.70E+00

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 5.66E-06 Exposure not Likely Significant

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.79E-01

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation 

LD50 6.64E-02 Exposure not Likely Significant
46

Appendix F: Bibliography

Environmental Fate (sorted by MRID)

MRID Citation Reference

44946336 Jernberg, K.; Lee, D. (1996) Hydrolysis of (14-carbon) DPX-JE874 in Buffer 

Solutions of pH 5, 7, and 9: Lab Project Number: AMR 2433-92. Unpublished 

study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 84 p. 

44946337 Jernberg, K.; Lee, D. (1996) Photolysis of (14-carbon) DPX-JE874 in Ph 5 Buffer 

Solution: Lab Project Number: AMR 2503-92. Unpublished study prepared by 

E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 72 p. 

44946338 Schneiders, G.; Irelan, M. (1996) Photodegradation of Radiolabeled DPX-JE874 

on Soil Conducted in Simulated Sunlight: Lab Project Number: AMR 3144-94. 

Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 88 p. 

44946339 Kaman, R. (1996) Degradation of (14-carbon)DPX-JE874 in Four Soils: Lab 

Project Number: 6626-95-0223-EF-001: AMR 3670-95. Unpublished study 

prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 114 p. 

44946402 Kaman, R. (1996) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of (carbon-14)DPX-JE874: Lab 

Project Number: 6496-95-0116-EF-001: AMR-3556-95. Unpublished study 

prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 108 p. 

44946403 Grochulska, J. (1999) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of (carbon-14)DPX-JE874: 

Supplement No. 1: Lab Project Number: AMR 3556-95: 6496-95-0116-EF-001. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 12 p. 

45294102 Hatzenbeler, C. (2000) Rate of Degradation Study of IN-JS940 (a Metabolite of 

Famoxadone) in Three Soils: Lab Project Number: 4026: 012683-1. Unpublished 

study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 48 p. 

45358801 Theilacker, W.; Van-Nguyen, A. (2000) Rates of Degradation of IN-KZ007 (A 

Metabolite of Famoxadone) on Three Aerobic Soils: Lab Project Number: 

DUPONT-4300: 4300. Unpublished study prepared by DuPont Agricultural 

Products. 39 p. 

44946404 Hatzenbeler, C.; Kaman, R. (1996) Anaerobic Soil Metabolism of (carbon14)DPX-JE874: Lab Project Number: AMR 3579-95: 6506-95-0120-EF-001. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 104 p. 

45294102 Hatzenbeler, C. (2000) Rate of Degradation Study of IN-JS940 (a Metabolite of 

Famoxadone) in Three Soils: Lab Project Number: 4026: 012683-1. Unpublished 

study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 48 p. 
47

44946401 Grochulska, J. (1999) Degradation of (carbon-14)DPX-JE874 in Four Soils: 

Supplement No. 1: Lab Project Number: AMR 3670-95: 6496-95-0116-EF-001. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 17 p. 

44946406 DeLisio, P.; McClanahan, R. (1996) Aged Soil Column Leaching Study of (carbon14)DPX-JE874: Lab Project Number: 6649-95-0228-EF-001: AMR 3676-95. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 54 p. 

44946407 Jernberg, K. (1995) Soil Batch Equilibrium (Adsorption/Desorption) Study of 

DPX-JE874: Lab Project Number: AMR 2741-93. Unpublished study prepared by 

DuPont Agricultural Products. 31 p. 

44946408 2012555 Ball, M. (1999) Soil Batch Equilibrium (Adsorption/Desorption) 

Study of DPX-JE874: Supplement No. 1: Lab Project Number: AMR 2741-93. 

Unpublished study prepared by DuPont Agricultural Products. 8 p. 

44946409 Rose, K. (1996) Environmental Fate Studies of IN-KF015, a Degradation Product 

of DPX-JE874: Rate of Degradation in Soil and Adsorption to Soil: Lab Project 

Number: 6829-96-0050-EF-001: AMR 3937-96. Unpublished study prepared by 

Ricerca, Inc. 37 p. 

45294103 Singles, S. (2000) Adsorption/Desorption of IN-JS940 (a Metabolite of 

Famoxadone) in Four Soils: Lab Project Number: 3834. Unpublished study 

prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 70 p. 

45294104 Ohm, M.; Theilacker, W. (2000) Adsorption/Desorption of Famoxadone 

Metabolite IN-KZ007: Lab Project Number: 3266. Unpublished study prepared 

by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 50 p. 

46350401 Hahn, J. (2004) Batch Equilibrium (Adsorption/Desorption) of DPX-JE874 

(Famoxadone) in One Soil. Project Number: 48786, 13880. Unpublished study 

prepared by ABC Laboratories. 42 p.

44946410 McClory, J.; Holt, J. (1999) Field Soil Dissipation of Famoxadone and Cymoxanil 

Following Application of DPX-KP481 Fungicide, USA: Lab Project Number: 

ML97-0705DUP: AMR 4329-97. Unpublished study prepared by DuPont 

Agricultural Products and Morse Laboratories, Inc. 214 p. 

45294105 McClory, J. (2000) Field Soil Dissipation of Famoxadone and Cymoxanil 

Following Application of DPX-KP481 50WG Fungicide, WG, USA, 1999: Lab 

Project Number: 2342: ML99-0780-DUP. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du 

Pont de Nemours and Company and Morse Laboratories. 221 p. 

45294106 McClory, J. (2000) Field Soil Dissipation of Famoxadone and Cymoxanil 

Following Application of DPX-KP481 50WG Fungicide, WG, USA, 1999: Lab 

Project Number: AMR 4329-97: ML97-0705-DUP. Unpublished study prepared 

by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company and Morse Laboratories. 205 p. 

45358802 Bechtel, D. (2000) Field Soil Dissipation of Famoxadone and Indoxacarb 

Following Separate of Tank Mix Applications of DPX-KP481 Experimental 

Fungicide and Avaunt Insecticide at Two Canadian Sites: Lab Project Number: 
48

AMR 5119-98: ML98-0740-DUP: JEMP-98-920. Unpublished study prepared by 

Morse Labs., Inc. University of Guelph. 225 p. 

44946405 Hatzenbeler, C. (1996) Degradation of (carbon-14)DPX-JE874 in the 

Water/Sediment System: Lab Project Number: 6636-95-0230-EF-001: AMR 

3662-95. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 89 p. 

44946413 Kreamer, G. (1996) Bioconcentration of (Carbon-14)DPX-JE874 in Bluegill 

Sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus: Lab Project Number: 670-94: 9826: AMR 2493-

92. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 85 

p. 

44946414 Grochulska, J. (1999) Predicted Environmental Concentrations of Famoxadone 

in Surface Water, Groundwater and Soil Resulting from Application of DPXKP481 to Potatoes, Tomatoes, Curcurbits, and Lettuce for USA: Lab Project 

Number: DUPONT-1733. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de 

Nemours and Company. 43 p. 

44946335 Ball, M. (1999) Comprehensive Evaluation of the Environmental Fate of 

Famoxadone Fungicide: Lab Project Number: DUPONT-2161. Unpublished 

study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 45 p. 

47242527 Jernberg, K.; Class, T.; Hausmann, S. (2000) Freezer Storage Stability of 

Famoxadone and Flusilazone in Oil Seeds (Oilseed Rape). Project Number: 

AMR/5132/98, 274/G. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL Europe Gmbh. 56 

p.

44967204 Validation of Two Analytical Methods For The Determination Of Famoxadone 

In Water By GC/ECD". ECM0199W1

Environmental Effects 

44946232 Campbell, S.; Beavers, J. (1994) DPX-JE874-221: An Acute Oral Toxicity Study 

with the Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: 112-372: 404-94: 9819-002. 

Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 27 p. 

44946318 Palmer, S.; Grimes, J.; Beavers, J. (1996) DPX-KX007-5: An Acute Oral Toxicity 

Study with the Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: 112-443: 4103-96. 

Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 43 p. 

44946233 Campbell, S.; Beavers, J. (1994) DPX-JE874-221: A Dietary LC50 Study with 

the Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: 112-370: 437-94: 9819-002. 

Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 34 p. 

44946234 Campbell, S.; Beavers, J. (1994) DPX-JE874-221: A Dietary LC50 Study with 

the Mallard: Lab Project Number: 409-94: 9819-002: 112-371. Unpublished 

study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 34 p. 

44946235 Fosters, J.; Beavers, J.; Jaber, M. et al. (1996) DPX-JE874-221: A Reproduction 

Study with the Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus): Lab Project Number: 
49

112-386: 744-95. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 

171 p. 

44946236 Fosters, J.; Beavers, J.; Jaber, M. et al. (1998) DPX-JE874-221: A Reproduction 

Study with the Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus): Supplemental No. 1: 

Lab Project Number: 744-95: 112-386. Unpublished study prepared by 

Wildlife International Ltd. 8 p. 

44946237 Fosters, J.; Beavers, J.; Jaber, M. et al. (1996) DPX-JE874-221: A Reproduction 

Study with the Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos): Lab Project Number: 745-95: 

112-387. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 173 p. 

44946238 Fosters, J.; Beavers, J.; Jaber, M. et al. (1996) DPX-JE874-221: A Reproduction 

Study with the Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos): Supplement No. 1: Lab Project 

Number: 745-95: 112-387. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife 

International Ltd. 8 p. 

44967202 Grove, A. (1996) Extended Laboratory Study Comparing the Effects of DPXKX007 (Containing DPX-JE874 and Cymoxanil) WG and SC Formulations on 

Typhlodromus pyri, Following Multiple Applications on Grapevine Leaves 

Under Greenhouse Conditions: Lab Project Number: AMR 3312-96: 

DU003TPS. Unpublished study prepared by Mitox Stichting Duurzame 

Plaagbestrijding. 38 p. 

44946239 Brown, M. (1994) Flow-Through Acute, 96-Hour LC50 of DPX-JE874-133 to 

Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss: Revision No. 2: Lab Project Number: 

9581-046: 518-93. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours 

and Co. 37 p. 

44946301 Brown, M. (1994) Flow-Through Acute, 96-Hour LC50 of DPX-JE874-133 to 

Bluegill Sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus: Revision No. 2: Lab Project Number: 

9581-046: HLR 661-93: HA-93-032. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du 

Pont de Nemours and Company. 38 p. 

44946302 Samel, A. (1999) DPX-KX007: Static, Acute, Toxicity to Rainbow Trout, 

Oncorhynchus mykiss, in the Presence of Sediment: Lab Project Number: HL1998-01530. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and 

Company. 37 p. 

44946303 Samel, A. (1998) DPX-KP481: Static, Acute, Toxicity to Rainbow Trout, 

Oncorhynchus mykiss, in the Presence of Sediment: Lab Project Number: 

DUPONT-1296. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and 

Company. 38 p. 

46144801 Brown, M. (1997) DPX-KP481-25 50WG: Flow-Through, Acute, 96-Hour LC50 

to Rainbow Trout, Oncorynchus mykiss. Project Number: 10403, 

HL/1997/00440. Unpublished study prepared by Dupont Haskell Laboratory. 

39 p.

44946306 Brown, M. (1997) IN-JS940-1: Static, Acute, 96-Hour Limit Test to Rainbow 

Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss: Lab Project Number: 636-96: 10589. 
50

Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 29 p. 

Metabolite of Famoxadone

44946307 Boeri, R.; Kowalski, P.; Ward, T. (1994) Flow-Through, Acute 48-Hour EC50 of 

DPX-JE874-133 to Daphnia magna: Lab Project Number: 748-93: 255-DU: HA93-113. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and 

Company. 126 p. 

44946305 Brown, M. (1996) Static, Acute, 48-Hour Limit Test of IN-JS940-1 to Daphnia 

magna: Lab Project Number: HLR381-96: 10589. Unpublished study prepared 

by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 27 p. PC Code 613202 

Benzeneacetic acid,.alpha.-hydroxy-.alpha.-methyl-4-phenoxy44946309 Ward, T.; Kowalski, P.; Boeri, R. (1997) Flow-Through Acute Toxicity of DPXJE874-221 to the Sheepshead Minnow, Cyprinodon variegatus: Lab Project 

Number: HLO-1997-00166: 10370: 796-DU. Unpublished study prepared by 

T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 41 p. 

44946310 Boeri, R.; Magazu, J.; Ward, T. (1998) Famoxadone Technical: Flow-Through 

Mollusc Shell Deposition Test: Lab Project Number: AMR 4642-97: 1341-DU. 

Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 39 p. 

44946311 Ward, T.; Kowalski, P.; Boeri, R. (1997) Acute Toxicity of DPX-JE874-221 to 

the Mysid, Mysidopsis bahia: Lab Project Number: HLO1077-96: 10370: 797-

DU. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 40 p. 

44946308 Forster, A. (1999) (Carbon-14) Famoxadone: To Assess the Toxicity to the 

Sediment Dwelling Phase of the Midge Chironomus riparius: Lab Project 

Number: 1538: DPT461: DUPONT1154. Unpublished study prepared by 

Huntingdon Life Sciences Ltd. 73 p. 

44946312 Kreamer, G. (1996) Early Life-Stage Toxicity of DPX-JE874-221 with Rainbow 

Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss: Lab Project Number: HLR300-95: 10025-001: 

MR10025. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and 

Company. 616 p. 

44946313 Brown, M. (1996) Flow-Through, 21-Day Toxicity of DPX-JE874-221 to 

Daphnia magna: Lab Project Number: HLR90-95: 9819-001: HA-94-106. 

Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. 377 

p. 

44946314 Boeri, R.; Magazu, J.; Ward, T. (1998) Famoxadone Technical: Flow-Through 

Early Life Stage Toxicity to the Sheepshead Minnow, Cyprinodon variegatus: 

Lab Project Number: AMR 4644-97: 1343-DU. Unpublished study prepared 

by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 50 p. 

44946315 Ward, T.; Magazu, J.; Boeri, R. (1998) Famoxadone Technical: Flow-Through 

Chronic Toxicity to the Mysid, Mysidopsis bahia: Lab Project Number: AMR 

4643-97: 1342-DU. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, 

Inc. 58 p. 
51

44946319 Heldreth, K. (1998) DPX-JE874: Influence on Seedling Emergence and 

Vegetative Vigor of Several Terrestrial Plants: Lab Project Number: AMR 

4964-98: MR12199. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours 

and Company. 105 p. 

44946320 Sloman, T.; Leva, S. (1998) Famoxadone Technical: Influence on Growth and 

Reproduction of Lemna gibba G3: Lab Project Number: AMR 3601-95: 

MR11687: HA-97-144. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de 

Nemours and Company. 36 p. 

44946321 Boeri, R.; Magazu, J.; Ward, T. (1997) Famoxadone Technical: Growth and 

Reproduction Test with the Marine Alga, Skeletonema costatum: Lab Project 

Number: AMR 4647-97: 1346-DU. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. 

Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 39 p. 

44946322 Thompson, S. (1996) DPX-JE874-221: Influence on Growth and Reproduction 

of Selenastrum capricornutum: Lab Project Number: 112A-139: AMR 3422-

95. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. and E.I. du 

Pont de Nemours and Company. 47 p. 

44946323 Boeri, R.; Magazu, J.; Ward, T. (1998) Famoxadone Technical: Growth and 

Reproduction Test with the Freshwater Alga, Navicula pelliculosa: Lab Project 

Number: AMR 4645-97: 1344-DU. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. 

Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 41 p. 

44946324 Boeri, R.; Magazu, J.; Ward, T. (1998) Famoxadone Technical: Growth and 

Reproduction Test with the Freshwater Alga, Anabaena flos-aquae: Lab 

Project Number: AMR4646-97: 1345-DU. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. 

Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 40 p. 

44946325 Palmer, S.; Beavers, J. (1994) DPX-JE874-133: A Dietary LC50 Toxicity Study 

with the Honey Bee: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 112-358: 278-94. 

Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 15 p.

44946326 Palmer, S.; Beavers, J. (1994) DPX-JE874-133: An Acute Contact Toxicity Study 

with the Honey Bee: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 112-359: 279-94: 

9700-001. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 16 p. 

46350402 Priester, T. (1996) DPX-KX007-5: Laboratory Acute Oral and Contact Toxicity 

Test with the Honeybee, Apis mellifera: Final Report. Project Number: 

96/005/1028, 1028/001/265, AMR/3828/96. Unpublished study prepared by 

Springborn Laboratories (Europe) Ag. 40 p.

46350403 Sindermann, A.; Porch, J.; Krueger, H. (2004) Cymoxanil/Famoxadone (DPXKP481) 50WG (1:1): A Foliage Residue Toxicity Study with the Honey Bee. 

Project Number: 112/550, DUPONT/14096, 15296. Unpublished study 

prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 25 p.

44946325 Palmer, S.; Beavers, J. (1994) DPX-JE874-133: A Dietary LC50 Toxicity Study 

with the Honey Bee: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 112-358: 278-94. 

Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 15 p. 
52

44946327 Kuhner, C. (1997) DPX-KP481, a Water Dispersible Granular (WG) 

Formulation Containing DPX-JE874 (254 g ai/kg) and Cymoxanil (266 g ai/kg): 

Acute Toxicity to the Staphylinid Beetle, Aleochara bilineata Gyll. 

(Coleoptera, Staphylinidae) in the Laboratory: Final Report: Lab Project 

Number: AMR 4235-96: 96259/01-NLAB. Unpublished study prepared by 

GAB Biotechnologie GmbH and IFU Umweltanalytik GmbH. 22 p. 

44946328 Kuhner, C. (1997) DPX-KP481, a Water Dispersible Granular (WG) 

Formulation Containing DPX-JE874 (254 g ai/kg) and Cymoxanil (266 g ai/kg): 

Acute Toxicity to the Green Lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea steph. 

(Neuroptera, Chrysopidae) in the Laboratory: Final Report: Lab Project 

Number: AMR4234-96: 96259/01-NLCC. Unpublished study prepared by GAB 

Biotechnologie GmbH IFU Umweltanalytik GmbH. 25 p. 

44946329 Kuhner, C. (1997) DPX-KP481, a Water Dispersible Granular (WG) 

Formulation Containing DPX-JE874 (254 g ai/kg) and Cymoxanil (266 g ai/kg): 

Acute Toxicity to the Hoverfly, Episyrphus balteatus DEG. (Diptera; 

Syrphidae) in the Laboratory: Final Report: Lab Project Number: AMR4232-

96: 96259/01-NLEB. Unpublished study prepared by GAB Biotechnologie 

GmbH IFU Umweltanalytik GmbH. 30 p. 

44946330 Kuhner, C. (1997) DPX-KP481, a Water Dispersible Granular (WG) 

Formulation Containing DPX-JE874 (254 g ai/kg) and Cymoxanil (266 g ai/kg): 

Acute Toxicity to the Ground Beetle, Poecilus cupreus L. (Coleoptera, 

Carabidae) in the Laboratory: Final Report: Lab Project Number: AMR4233-

96: 96259/01-NLPC. Unpublished study prepared by GAB Biotechnologie 

GmbH IFU Umweltanalytik GbmH. 29 p. 

44946331 Thompson, B. (1999) Cymoxanil/Famoxadone (DPX-KP481) 50 WG 

(25%:25%). An Extended Laboratory Study to Evaluate the Effects on the 

Green Lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea: Lab Project Number: DP-97-8: 

AMR4540-97. Unpublished study prepared by Agrochemical Evaluation Unit 

School of Biological Sciences University of Southampton. 24 p. 

44946333 Beech, P.; Mead-Briggs, M. (1998) Cymoxanil/Famoxadone (DPX-KP481) 50 

WG (25%:25%). An Extended Laboratory Study to Evaluate the Effects on the 

Ground Beetle, Poecilus cupreus: Lab Project Number: DP-97-10: AMR4539-

97. Unpublished study prepared by Agrochemical Evaluation Unit School of 

Biological Sciences University of Southampton. 22 p. 

44946334 Thompson, B. (1999) Cymoxanil/Famoxadone (DPX-KP481) 50 WG 

(25%:25%). A Semi-field Study to Evaluate the Effects on Aphid Parasitoids 

(Hymenoptera, Aphidiinae) in a Potato Crop: Lab Project Number: DP-97-3: 

AMR4542-97. Unpublished study prepared by Agrochemical Evaluation Unit 

School of Biological Sciences University of Southampton. 35 p. 

44946332 Thompson, B. (1999) Cymoxanil/Famoxadone (DPX-KP481) 50 WG 

(25%:25%): an Extended Laboratory Study to Evaluate the Effects on the 

Hoverfly, Episyrphus balteatus: Lab Project Number: DP-97-9: AMR4541-97. 
53

Unpublished study prepared by Agrochemical Evaluation Unit School of 

Biological Sciences University of Southampton. 32 p. 

44967202 Grove, A. (1996) Extended Laboratory Study Comparing the Effects of DPXKX007 (Containing DPX-JE874 and Cymoxanil) WG and SC Formulations on 

Typhlodromus pyri, Following Multiple Applications on Grapevine Leaves 

Under Greenhouse Conditions: Lab Project Number: AMR 3312-96: 

DU003TPS. Unpublished study prepared by Mitox Stichting Duurzame 

Plaagbestrijding. 38 p. 

44946308 Forster, A. (1999) (Carbon-14) Famoxadone: To Assess the Toxicity to the 

Sediment Dwelling Phase of the Midge Chironomus riparius: Lab Project 

Number: 1538: DPT461: DUPONT1154. Unpublished study prepared by 

Huntingdon Life Sciences Ltd. 73 p.

44946304 Leva, S. (1999) An Evaluation of Aquatic Effects of Famoxadone Using RiskBased Fish Studies: Lab Project Number: DUPONT-2038: DUPONT-1296: HL1998-01530. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de Nemours and 

Company. 91 p. 

44946316 Hawkes, A.; Leva, S. (1999) Famoxadone: A Prospective Tier 1 Ecological 

Effects Assessment for Non-Target Organisms: Lab Project Number: 

DUPONT-2117: DUPONT-1733. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont 

de Nemours and Company. 78 p. 

44946317 Leva, S.; Ball, M.; Hawkes, A. et al. (1999) Tier 1 Environmental Risk 

Assessment of DuPont DPX-KP481 Fungicide (Containing 25% Famoxadone 

and 25% Cymoxanil) and Competitive Fungicides in the USA: Lab Project 

Number: DUPONT-2037. Unpublished study prepared by E.I. du Pont de 

Nemours and Company. 45 p. 

44967203 Caley, C.; Knight, B.; Boyle, J. (1994) DPX-JE874-221: Determination of Acute 

Toxicity (LC50) in Earthworms: Lab Project Number: 10206: 383475: IRI 

383475. Unpublished study prepared by Inveresk Research International. 33 

p. 
54

Appendix G: Health Effect Division’s MARC Document
55
56
57
58
59