###### Abstract  
The use of synthetic molecules to achieve specific goals is steadily increasing in the environment, and these molecules adversely impact human health and ecosystem services. Considering the adverse effects, a better understanding of how these molecules behave in the environment and their associated risks is necessary to keep their use acceptably limited. To meet the demands of farmers and combat weed problems, woodlands and farmlands are sprayed with agrochemicals, primarily glyphosate-based herbicides. Farmers increasingly embrace these herbicides containing glyphosate. Glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), a key metabolite of glyphosate, have been reported as toxicological concerns when they become more prevalent in the food chain. The chemical glyphosate has been linked to various health issues in humans and other living organisms, including endocrine disruption, reproductive issues, tumours, non-Hodgkin lymphomas, and liver, heart, and blood problems. Therefore, the current review aims to compile data on glyphosate-based herbicide use in the environment, potential risks to human and ecological health, and various maximum residual limits for crops as suggested by international organizations. As a result, regulatory agencies can advise glyphosate users on safe usage practices and synthesize herbicides more efficiently. Keywords:glyphosate-based herbicide; AMPA; toxicological effect; ecological risk; regulations +
Footnote †: journal: Medical  
important herbicide in that area [8]. Glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) come in a variety of commercial formulations, including broad-spectrum, non-selective, post-emergent, and synthetic herbicides [9]. The first glyphosate was developed in 1950, and its herbicidal properties were only discovered in 1970 when GBHs were resynthesized and tested [10]. The herbicide Roundup contains 'GLY\" as an active component, which was introduced and commercialized by Monsanto Corporation in 1974 [11]. Agricultural weed control with glyphosate quickly became popular with farmers, who gained the ability to eliminate weeds without causing crop damage [8]. According to [PERSON] et al. [12], the glyphosate hinders the synthesis of amino acids including tyrosine, phenylalanine, and tryptophan, thereby killing weeds without destroying the agricultural crops. Its use has progressively increased in non-agricultural and agricultural settings, and it is now the most common herbicide worldwide [13,14]. In addition, many agrochemical companies market GLY formulations in various strengths and with various adjuvants, because they have already been reviewed and registered by regulatory organizations [11,15]. It was decided by the European Union Council on 27 November 2017 that glyphosate would be permitted to be used for five more years with the majority of 18 member nations voting in favor of allowing the use [16]. As a result, GLY can be used as a component of plant protection products (PPPs) through the end of 2022 [17]. Agencies in Europe, such as the European Food Safety Authority and the European Chemicals Agency, conducted a thorough assessment of GLY in recent years based on concerns over its environmental and human health consequences [18]. Based on current scientific data, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) concluded that glyphosate does not meet the criteria for a carcinogenicity hazard classification, and cannot be categorized as a carcinogen, reproductively harmful substance or mutagen [16,19]. As part of EFSA's risk-assessment process, the scientific committee has been asked to create guidelines on how to describe, record, and justify uncertainty [20]. In order to continue the renewal as an element in PPPs, GLY must not have a negative impact on the environment or human or animal health, according to European laws [21]. Glyphosate's widespread use stems from its effectiveness in weed control at a reasonable price, its presumed low toxicity, fast uptake by plants, and gradual weed resistance development to glyphosate [22].