UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C

. 20460 

## APR 0 7

## 2014

MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

SUBJECT: Characterization ofFluazinam Use and Usage on Major Crops (mainly Potatoes and Peanuts) FROM:

THRU: Tara Chandgoyal, Plant Pathologist Biological Analysis Branch Cynthia Doucoure, Environmental Protection Specialist 

## t**~** Science Information and Analysis Branch
Andrew Lee, Economist 

# a jc· j Economic Analysis Branch

# ~ Biological and Economic Analysis Division (750 ) Arnet Jones, Chief Biological Analysis Bran Diann Sims, Chief**A.J~,C...~-"):"f-A'" ·..-v;v**  Science Information and Analysis Branch Timothy Kiely, Chief 

# 0l Wl Economic Analysis Branch Biological and Economic Analysis vision (7503 

### TO: Eric Miederhoff, Chemical Review Manager Risk Management and Implementation Branch V Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P)



### Product Review Panel date: February 26, 2014

Page 

### 1 of7SUMMARY:
Fluazinam fungicide was registered in 2000 for the control offungal diseases on potatoes and peanuts. Subsequently, it has been registered for the control offungal diseases onmany other crops. Fluazinam plays a role inplant disease control on various crops and resistance management because its mode ofaction against fungi (uncouples the oxidative phosphorylation in respiration process offungi) is different than the registered alternatives. However, when compared with other fungicide alternatives, it appears thatfluazinam is a viable alternative for control oflate blight onpotatoes, but does not appear to play a majorrole in the control ofwhite mold onpotatoes orblight on peanuts. According to private market research, reported use offluazinam onpotatoes, peanuts, and other crops has declined since 2000. Inthe years from 2004 to 2012, the average percent crop treated (PCT) for use offluazinam onpotatoes was 15%, while the PCT for use onpeanuts was less than 2.5%. Inrecent years, an average of57,000 pounds offluazinam was applied annually on all crops. An average of 1.4 applications offluazinam was applied on potatoes at an average application rate of0.2 lbs a.i. per acre, while onpeanuts, an average of 1.4 applications of fluazinam was applied at an average application rate of0.5 lbs a.i. per acre (2007-2012). 

### BACKGROUND:
BEAD was asked to provide usage data to support the revision ofthe addendum to the Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) risk assessment, which discusses the justificationfor using new studies that indicate a shorterhalf-life for foliar dissipation from 35 days to 7

.33 days and revises terrestrial risk quotients (RQs) for birds and mammals. BEAD was also asked to provide characterization offluazinam use and usage on major crops and its role in pest control. 

### FLUAZINAMUSE AND USAGE CHARACTERIZATION: FluazinamLabeled Use Sites: Fluazinam was initially registered for use onpeanuts and potatoes in 2000. Several new uses were added from 2008-2012 as shown in Table 1below. This document provides usage information only for the crops for which we have reported use as found in private market research surveys from 1998-2012, including potatoes, peanuts, beans (snap, bush, pole, and string), dry beans/peas, and lima beans.

Page 2 of7T bl 1 Fl a e uazmam R . egtsteredUses, 2008 2012


## - New Uses/Use Groups Date ofRe2istration Edible -poddedbeans (Subgroup 6A, exceptpeas), 3/27/2008 shelled succulent, includes lima bean (Subgroup 6B, except peas), dry beans (Subgroup 6C, except peas and soybeans) brassica leafy vegetables including turnip greens (Crop Group 5), bushberries (Subgroup 13-07B), ginseng, aerial use on potatoes Leafand head lettuce and bulb onions 5/28/2010 Apples and carrots 1131/2011 Ornamental Turf 6/29/2012 Melon subgroup 9A, eggplant/peppers subgrou_I>_lOB 11/1/2012

.. Source: Office ofPest1c1de Programs Information Network (OPPIN)



### Fluazinam Top Crops: Comparison ofUsage in 2001-2006 and 2007-2012
Potatoes and peanuts constituted 100% ofthefluazinam usage in the U.S. during the 2001-2006 time frame and nearly 90% ofuse during the 2007-2012 time. The average a.i. application rates are the sameinbothperiods with fluazinam use onpeanuts being applied at a higher rate than potatoes as shown in Table 2 below. Based onthe available data, the number ofapplications of fluazinam onpeanuts and potatoes decreased in recent years to 1.4 applications.
BEAD did not find reported use offluazinam ontheremaining uses inpart due to therecent dates ofregistration.

Table 2. FluazinamTop Crops: Comparison ofUsage betweenthe 2001-2006 and 2007-2012 Timeframes. 2001-2006 2007-2012 AvgAnnual Lbs A.l. Applied = 70,000 Avg Annual Lbs A.l. Applied= 57,000 Crop Avg. A.I. #of Crop Avg. A.I. #of Proportion Rate of Apps Proportion Rate of Apps

ofTotal Application ofTotal Application Lbs A.I. of 

## Ob Lbs A.I. of 

## Ob Fluazinam a.iJacre) Fluazinam a.iJacre)

Applied Applied Peanuts 17% 0.5 1.8 Peanuts 19% 0.5 1.4 Potatoes 83% 0.2 2.4 Potatoes 69% 0.2 1.4 Other* 12% 0.3 0.3 * Other crops include beans (snap, bush, pole, and string), drybeans/peas, and lima beans. Source: Propnetary Data, 2001-2012

Page3 of7

### Fluazinam Percent ofCrop Treated: Potatoes andPeanuts, 2004-2012 Available data shows that during the 2004-2012 time frame, the average percent ofcrop treated for potatoes was 15%, while for peanuts, the average percent ofcrop treated was less than 2.5%. The average PCT for the remaining crops were all less than 2.5%. SeeTable 3 below.

T bl 3 Fl

a e uazmam percen rop rea e , 

## - t C T t d 2004 2012 2004-2012 Crop Average Lbs AI AveragePCT MaxPCT Applied Peanuts 10,000 <2.5 5 Potatoes 60,000 15 20 Other 1 ,000 or less <2.5 <2.5 Source: Propnetary Data 2004-2012



### BIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS: Fluazinam is labeled for controlling various fungal diseases ondifferent crops (Table 1). The Fungicide Resistance Action Committee (FRAC, 2013) has designated fluazinam as FRAC Code 29 (it is in -dinitro- anilines chemical group). It has a unique mode ofaction (it uncouples the oxidative phosphorylation in respiration process offungi). It is considered as a low risk group for resistance-development in fungi. It appears that fluazinam plays an important role in resistance management. The top crop treated with fluazinam is potatoes to control lateblight disease and white mold disease. There are 42 fungicides reported to beused on potatoes for the control oflate blight and 7 fungicides reported are used against white mold (Proprietary Data, 2007-2012). The top fungicides used to control late blight and white mold are shown in Tables 4 and 5 below. The available usage data show that as much as 15 percent ofpotato acreage is treated with fluazinam (Table 3), a relatively high proportion that suggests a large number ofgrowers find the chemical useful. The available data also suggests that fluazinam plays a role in resistance management because its mode ofaction is different than the registered alternatives onthese crops and it has a low risk ofdeveloping resistance. Fluazinam is also used to control Sclerotiniablight disease inpeanuts. There are 13 fungicides reported to beused onpeanuts to control peanut blight (Proprietary Data, 2007-2012). See Table 6 below. The available usage data shows that less than 2.5 percent ofpeanut acreage is treated with fluazinam (Table 3), a relatively low proportionthat suggests that growers do not find the chemical as useful as otherfungicides, but it may play a role in resistance managementbecause ofits mode ofaction.

Page 4 of7

### Table 4. 

### Top Fungicides Used onPotatoes to Control Late Blight, 2007-2012 Total Avg. Pounds Area Numof Actbe

_ l·**~~ent** AI · Treated Apps CHLOROTHALONll.. 10,960,000 12,481,000 4.8 MANCOZEB 8,110,000 6,815,000 3.0 CYMOXANll.. 103,000 934,000 1.2 METIRAM 1,263,000 905,000 2.8 PYRACLOSTROBIN 114,000 902,000 1.5 AZOXYSTROBIN 100,000 773,000 1.4 BOSCALID 169,000 741,000 1.4 FE NTIN 87,000 690,000 1.8 FAMOXADONE 67,000 630,000 1.1 MANDIPROP AMID 61,000 595,000 1.4 DIFENOCONAZOLE 59,000 583,000 1.4 FLUAZINAM 91,000 418,000 1.3 OTHER 1,260,202 2,137,230


### Source: Proprietary Data, 2007-2012



### T bl 5 T F . "d U d P

a e op ung1c1 es se on otatoes to 

## contro1

### White Mold, 2007-2012

-· Totid Avg. Pounds Area_ Numof Active**~~ent** AI Treated**~pps _**  CHLOROTHALONll.. 106,000 141,000 11.6 CYMOXANll.. 1,000 13,000 1.0 FAMOXADONE 1,000 13,000 1.0 COPPER HYDROXIDE 13,000 11,000 7.5 MANCOZEB 8,000 9,000 2.4 METIRAM 10,000 6,000 2.0 FLUAZINAM 82 418 1.0 

### Source: Proprietary Data, 2007-2012



### PageS of7Table 6. Top Fungicides Used onPeanuts to Control Blight, 2007-2012 

### Pounds Total Area Avg.Num Active**IUKa~ent** 

### AI Treated ofApps TEBUCONAZOLE 12,000 77,000 3.5 PROPICONAZOLE 5,000 64,000 2.3 CHLOROTHALONIL 60,000 61,000 2.2 PROTIDOCONAZOLE 4,000 56,000 3

.8 FLUTOLANIL 13,000 36,000 4.0 PYRACLOSTROBIN 6,0001 33,000 1.2 TRIFLOXYSTROBIN 1,000 17,000 1.3 AZOXYSTROBIN 900 14,000 1.0 MEFENOXAM 40 10,000 1.0 FLUDIOXONIL 30 7,000 1.0 BOSCALID 2,000 4,000 1.2 FLUAZINAM 2,000 3,000 1.0 PENTIDOPYRAD 300 1,000 3.0 Source: Proprietary Data, 2007-2012

CONCLUSION: Fluazinam is used onpotatoes and peanut to control fungal diseases, especially lateblight in potato and blight in peanut. As much as 15 percent ofpotato acreage is treated with fluazinam, a relativelyhigh proportion that suggests a large number ofgrowers find the chemical useful. However, there are many fungicides that are used more widely to control blight. Fluazinam plays a role in resistance management because its mode ofaction is different than the registered alternatives onthese crops and ithas a low risk ofresistance developing. Use offluazinam on other crops, including beans (snap, bush, pole, and string), drybeans/peas, and limabeans constitute only 12% ofusage offluazinam in recent years. Data onthe use offluazinam on other crops, including beans, apples, and carrots, are not available given how recently fluazinam was registered for these sites.

REFERENCES: Brandenburg, RL., Jordan, DL., Shew, BB., Wilcut, JW. And Toth, SJ. 2005. Crop Profile for Peanuts in North Carolina. Accessed onFebruary 11, 2014. http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/docs/ncpeanuts.pdf
FRAC. 2013

. Accessed onFebruary4, 2014

.http://www.frac.info/publication/anhang!FRAC%20Code%20List%202013-update%20April2013.pdf

.



# .**~** Page 6 of7Luper, C., Criswell, JT., Bolin, P., Medlin, C., Mulder, P and bamicone, J. 2007. Crop Profile for Peanuts in Oklahoma. Accessed February 10, 2014. http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/docs/0Kpeanuts.pdf Proprietary Data, 2001-2012

Page 7 qf7