UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

NOV 012012 

MEMORANDUM 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

SUBJECT: BEAD Chemical Profile for Registration Review: Fluopicolide (027412) 

FROM: 

THRU: 

TO: 

Carl Chen, Plant Pathologist 

Biological Analysis Branch 

Jihad Alsadek, Economist ,/~ A- Jff,~k. Science Information and Analysis Branch 

Stephen Smearman, Economist ) . . /' () 

Biological 

Economic Analysis 

and Economic 

Branch 

Analysis 

/~ 

Division 

UM 

(7503P) 

~ 

Amet Jones, Chief 

Biological Analysis Branch 

Diann Sims, Chief ;(;};~ Science Information and Analysis Branch 

Economic 

Timothy Kiely, 

Analysis 

Chief 

Branch \..J 

~ j 1M. ~ 

Biological and Economic Analysis Divisio 503P) 

Russell Wasem, Chemical Review Manager 

Risk Management and Implementation Branch 1 

Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P) 

Product Review Panel date: August 29, 2012 

INTRODUCTION 

The purpose of this document is to convey usage information and a broad overview of the pest 

management roles of pesticides that are beginning to undergo registration review. The 

anticipated audience consists of the team of EPA staff currently evaluating the registration status 

of fluopicolide, and eventually the general public. This document builds upon the data already 

1 
provided in the "Usage and Label Use Data Packages" that are also provided to Registration 

Review teams by BEAD. The document is based on information and data available to BEAD as 

of August 2012. 

Fluopicolide, a relatively new fungicide registered in 2007, is in a group of benzamides. The 

target site of action of this group of fungicides is to de localize spectrin-like proteins effectively 

against oomycete fungi. The mesosystemic fungicide has been registered and used to control 

some important plant diseases including downy mildew and Phytophthora blight on cucurbit 

vegetables, Phytophthora diseases on peppers, and downy mildew on lettuce and onion. 

Fluopicolide is also registered for use on turfgrass to control Pythium diseases, and on 

ornamentals to control Pythium diseases, downy mildew, and Phytophthora diseases. 

COMMON FORMULATIONS AND APPLICATION METHODS 

Fluopicolide is formulated as a suspension concentrate. 

USE SITES 

Agricultural Use Sites 

Fluopicolide is a fungicide registered for use on currants, grapes, huckleberries, nut trees, pome 

fruits, flavoring and spice crops, cucurbits, eggplant, tomatoes and other fruiting vegetables, 

leafy and stem vegetables (like spinach, broccoli, etc.), root crop vegetables, okra, onions, sugar 

beets and turnips. 

Non-Agricultural Use Sites 

Fluopicolide is a fungicide registered for use on forest trees, herbaceous plants, ornamental 

plants, ornamental lawns and turf, ornamental woody shrubs and vines, ornamental trees, 

recreational areas, parks, athletic fields, commercial and industrial areas. 

USAGE 

Agricultural Usage 

The use of fluopicolide from 2008-2011, in Figure 1, shows a steady increase. Given the recent 

registration of this chemical it appears for over the four years of use, the use trend for 

fluopicolide is modestly increasing. 

(http://www.epa.gov/opprdOOllfactsheets/fluopicolide.html), see Figure 1. 

2 
Figure 1. Agricultural Usage Data for Fluopicolide in Pounds A.I. on all Crops (2008-2011) 

ci. 

Ill 

"'CI 

c 

:::J 

0 

1:1. 

2008 2009 2010 2011 

Years 

All crops include cucumbers, lettuce, squash, pumpkins, peppers, watermelons, spinach, cantaloupes, and onions. 

Source: 

Proprietary Data, 2008 -20 II 

Figure 2 provides usage data for the crops with the most usage, cucumbers, lettuce, peppers, 

pumpkins, spinach, squash, and watermelons. The use of fluopicolide on cucumbers, lettuce, 

peppers, pumpkins, squash, watermelons, and other is rising from 2008 to 2011. There was no 

reported usage data for lettuce, peppers, and watermelons in 2008. There was no reported usage 

data for spinach and other in 2008 and 2010. The use on squash from 2008 to 2010 declined 

modestly and appears to have leveled off in 2011. 

Figure 2. Agricultural Usage Data for Fluopicolide Top Crops (2008-2011) 

6,000 

ci. 

Ill 

"'CI 

c 

:::J 

0 

1:1. 

0 co 0'1 0 0 0 0 N N 

Years 

Other crops include cantaloupes (2%), and onions (1%). 

Source: Proprietary Data, 2008-20 II 

Cucumbers 

- Lettuce 

_.,_Peppers 

Pumpkins 

- Spinach 

0 rl 

Squash 

rl rl 

0 0 Watermelons N N 

- other 

From 2008-2011, the annual total agricultural usage averaged approximately 6,000 pounds active 

ingredient (a.i.) for 50,000 treated acres with an overall application rate of O.llbs. a.i. per acre. 

3 
Table 1, for the same time frame (2008-2011), shows the crops with the most use in terms of 

total pounds of active ingredient applied and total acres treated in acres 

Table 1. Fluopicolide's Top Crops in Terms Percent ofLbs. Applied & TAT in Acres 

(2008-2011) 

% Pounds A lied %Total Area Treated 

52% 53% 

14% 12% 

11% 12% 

7% 7% 

5% 5% 

4% 4% 

4% 3% 

Source: Proprietary Data, 2008-2011 

On average, the states with the most agricultural usage in terms of pounds a.i. applied are 

Georgia (27%), Michigan (21 %), and California (20%), (Proprietary Data, 2008-2011). 

Agricultural Usage by Crop Reporting District 

Another measure of usage is the use intensity. In this analysis, the use intensity is expressed as 

the pounds a.i. applied per acre of land in farms. This differs from the application rate, which is 

expressed as the pounds a.i. applied per treated area. Figure 3 spatially represents fluopicolide's 

use intensity in the U.S. 

4 
Figure 3. Fluopicolide Usage by Crop Reporting District (2006-2010) 

Average Pounds Per 

1,000Acres of Farmland 

.. <0.02 

0.02-0.05 

c=J 0.06-0.15 

0.16-0.40 

Sources: 

Proprietary Data. 2006-2010 

USDA, 2006-2010. NASS Crop Reporting Districts. 

http://www .ers. usda. gov/briefinglarms/resourceregions/resourceregions.htm#nass. 

USDA, 2007. Census of Agriculture. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/index.asp. 

This is a map of agricultural pesticide usage at the Crop Reporting District (CRD) level. CRDs are 

boundaries created by USDA NASS which are aggregates of counties (USDA, 2010). Pesticide usage is 

displayed as average pounds (for the years 2006-2010) per 1,000 acres of farmland in a CRD to normalize 

for the variation in farmland between CRDs. Farmland acreage was obtained from USDA (2007). 

Usage is based on private market surveys of pesticide use in agriculture (Proprietary Data, 2006-2010). 

The survey data are limited to the states that represent the top 80-90% of acreage for the individual crops; 

therefore, use may be occurring in regions outside the scope of the survey. CRDs showing no usage of 

pesticides may be due to either the lack of pesticide use in the region or non-participation in the 

agricultural surveys. In addition, across the years, there may be variations in the specific crops included in 

the CRD survey. This may result in a lower annual average for the CRD. 

5 
Non-Agricultural Usage 

The most recent (2006) Kline and Company, Inc. data did not show any use for fluopicolide. 

BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS RELEVANT TO FLUOPICOLIDE 

Fluopicolide is a Group 43 fungicide. Resistance to this group of fungicides is not known 

(FRAC, 2012). Fluopicolide labels instruct that fluopicolide must be tank mixed with another 

fungicide with a different mode of action for resistance management. In general, fluopicolide 

plays a role as a relatively new mode of action in resistance management. Because there was no 

evidence of cross-resistance between fluopicolide and other fungicides such as azoxystrobin, 

mandipropamid, cyazofamid, zoxamide, and mefenoxam, use of fluopicolide alternated and 

mixed with other oomycete fungicides to control Phytophthora capsici helps reduce the 

resistance risk and corresponding economic losses (Lu etal., 2011). 

HISTORY OF BEAD ASSESSMENTS FOR FLUOPICOLIDE 

A search of the BEAD Official Records data base and the Section 18 data base did n:ot find any 

assessments or Section 18 requests for fluopicolide. 

DATA NEEDS RELEVANT TO BEAD'S FUTURE WORK ON FLUOPICOLIDE 

Obtaining additional information on the following items would improve future BEAD 

assessments ofthe importance offluopicolide and may be required as part of the registration 

review of this pesticide. 

Additional information, in terms of pounds a.i. applied, average application rate, regional 

application, time of application, number of application per year and/or per season, and any other 

available data on non-agricultural sites from the registrant would improve future BEAD 

assessments of the importance of fluopicolide and may be required as part of the registration 

review of this pesticide. 

REFERENCES: 

Proprietary Data, 2008-2011 

Proprietary Data. 2006-2010 

USDA, 2006-2010. NASS Crop Reporting Districts. Online: 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefmg/arms/resourceregions/resourceregions.htm#nass. 

USDA, 2007. Census of Agriculture. Online: http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/index.asp. 

http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007 /index.asp.FRAC. 2012. Fungicide Resistance Action 

Committee. http://www.frac.info/frac/index.htm Accessed August 2012. 

http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/factsheetslfluopicolide.html 

6 
Lu XH, Hausbeck MK, Liu XL, Hao JJ. 2011. Wild type sensitivity and mutation analysis for 

resistance risk to fluopicolide in Phytophthora capsici. Plant Dis. 95:1535-1541. 

http://veggies.msu.edu/Journal%20Articles/Lu 2011 PD95- 1535-1541 Fluopicolide-Pcap.pdf 

7