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 )
.. /' () Economic Analysis Branch

### /~ UM

### ~ Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) Amet Jones, Chief Biological Analysis Branch Diann Sims,

# Chief**;(;};~** Science Information and Analysis Branch Timothy Kiely, Chief

# ~**~** Economic Analysis 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 ofthis document is to convey usage information and a broad overview ofthe pest management roles ofpesticides that are beginning to undergo registration review. The anticipated audience consists ofthe team ofEPA staffcurrently evaluating the registration status offluopicolide, and eventually the general public. This document builds upon the data already 1provided 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 ofAugust 2012. Fluopicolide, a relatively new fungicide registered in 2007, is in a group ofbenzamides. The target site ofaction ofthis group offungicides is to delocalize 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 onpeppers, and downy mildew on lettuce and onion. Fluopicolide is also registered for use onturfgrass 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 offluopicolide from 2008-2011, in Figure 1, shows a steady increase. Given the recent registration ofthis chemical it appears for over the four years ofuse, the use trend for fluopicolide is modestly increasing. (http://www.epa.gov/opprdOOllfactsheets/fluopicolide.html), see Figure 1.



### 2Figure 

### 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 -20II 

### Figure 2 provides usage data for the crops withthe most usage, cucumbers, lettuce, peppers, pumpkins, spinach, squash, and watermelons. The use offluopicolide 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 offin 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, 2008-20II**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 anoverall applicationrate ofO.llbs. a.i
.per acre. 

### 3Table 1, for the same time frame (2008-2011), shows the crops with the most use interms of total pounds ofactive 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 AreaTreated 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 ofpounds a.i. applied are Georgia (27%), Michigan (21 %), and California (20%), (Proprietary Data, 2008-2011). 

### Agricultural Usage by Crop Reporting District Another measure ofusage is the use intensity. In this analysis, the use intensity is expressed as the pounds a.i. applied per acre ofland in farms. This differs from the application rate, which is expressed as the pounds a.i. applied pertreated 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 ofAgriculture. 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 ofcounties (USDA, 2010). Pesticide usage is displayed as average pounds (for the years 2006-2010) per 1,000 acres offarmland in a CRD to normalize for the variation in farmland between CRDs
. Farmland acreage was obtained from USDA (2007). Usage is based on private market surveys ofpesticide use in agriculture (Proprietary Data, 2006-2010)
. The survey data are limited to the states thatrepresent the top 80-90% ofacreage for the individual crops; therefore, use may be occurring in regions outside the scope ofthe 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.



### 5Non-Agricultural Usage The mostrecent (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 offungicides is not known (FRAC, 2012). Fluopicolide labels instruct that fluopicolide mustbe tank mixed with another fungicide with a different mode ofaction for resistance management. In general, fluopicolide plays a role as a relatively new mode ofaction 

### in resistance management. Because there was no evidence ofcross-resistance between fluopicolide and other fungicides such as azoxystrobin, mandipropamid, cyazofamid, zoxamide, and mefenoxam, use offluopicolide 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 ofthe 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 maybe required as part ofthe registration review ofthis pesticide. Additional information, interms ofpounds a.i. applied, average application rate, regional application, time ofapplication, number ofapplication peryear and/or per season, and any other available data on non-agricultural sites from the registrant would improve future BEAD assessments ofthe importance offluopicolide and maybe required as part ofthe registration review ofthis 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 ofAgriculture. 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, LiuXL, Hao JJ. 2011. Wild type sensitivity and mutation analysis for resistance risk to fluopicolide inPhytophthora capsici. 

### Plant Dis. 95:1535-1541. http://veggies.msu.edu/Journal%20Articles/Lu 2011 PD95

- 1535-1541 Fluopicolide-Pcap.pdf

7