## 3 Environmental Hazards Posed by Glyphosate and AMPA Residues
### Glyphosate in Nontarget Plant Species  
In spite of the specified waiting period in harvested crops, glyphosate and AMPA residues are observed in unintended plant species after weed spraying [23]. Glyphosate residues in tree foliage that are unusually high (e.g., 1000 mg/kg) may be attributable to direct absorption into tree leaves due to airborne herbicide drift contamination [115]. In addition to the possible health problems associated with food contamination, glyphosate exposure can have phytotoxic effects. Reduced absorption of vital nutrients is one way phytotoxicity affects plant performance [116], nutritional imbalances, reduced yield, and poor food quality [117, 118]. Various studies have reported that about 50% of plant biomass being reduced following glyphosate contamination in some nontarget plant species [116, 119]. Following the application of GBH to crops, residual GLY and AMPA may remain in harvested crops and processed foods [120]. According to testing conducted by the UK Food Standard Agency, 27 out of 109 samples of bread had glyphosate residues of at least 0.2 mg/kg. The US Department of Agriculture Tests in 2011 revealed that 90.3% of 300 samples of soybeans contained glyphosate and 95.7% of which included AMPA with concentrations of 1.9 and 2.3 ppm, respectively [120].  
Consumers are exposed to more glyphosate residues through their food, so this exposure should also be considered [51]. By drifting, leaching, and surface runoff, biologically active herbicide interacts with biomass and is absorbed by soil and water [121]. Among other places, glyphosate contamination is found in human urine, animal urine, ground water, and human milk and meat from farm animals [122, 123, 124, 125, 32]. Therefore, interactions with other stressors should be investigated in a more realistic situation when interacting with biological systems or the environment [126, 127].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l} \hline
**Country** & **Year** & **Presence of Glyphosate/Concentration** & **References** \\ \hline United State & & & \\ _(Mixture)_ & 2002 & Of the sampled streams, 36\% were positive/about 8.7 g/L & [128] \\ _(Mixture)_ & 2013 & Of the sampled streams, 44\% were positive/about 27.8 g/L & [129] \\ _(Muslington, Maryland, Iowa, Wyoming)_ & 2005-2006 & Positive outcomes in all of the sampled streams/about 328 g/L & [130] \\ _(lowa, Indian, Mississippi)_ & 2004–2008 & Positive results for most of the sampled rivers/about 430 g/L after a storm. & [131] \\ \hline Spain & 2007–2010 & Of the groundwater samples, 41\% were positive/about 2.5 g/L. & [90] \\ \hline Canada & 2002 & Of the samples, 22\% were positive/about 6.07 g/L. & [132] \\ \hline Argentina & 2012 & Of the surface water samples, 35\% were positive/0.1/-7.5 g/L. & [133] \\ \hline Switzerland & 2016 & Positive results for most of the stream samples/about 2.1 g/L & [134] \\ \hline France & 2003–2004 & Positive results from 91\% of stream samples/up to 165 g/L & [135] \\ \hline Hungary & 2010-2011 & Positive results for most rivers and groundwater samples/about 0.001 ug/L & [136] \\ \hline Denmark & 1999–2009 & Of the surface water samples, 25\% were positive/about 3.1 ug/L & [137] \\ \hline Mexico & 2015 & The groundwater samples were used positive/about 14.2 ug/L. & [57] \\ \hline Germany & 1998 & Only a few positive samples in two tributaries of the Ruhr River/with concentrations up to 0.59 ug/L. & [138] \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Investigation of the presence and levels of glyphosate in surface and ground water samples collected from several countries in Europe, South America, and North America.