Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Georgios Archimidis Tsalidis
 -- 1432 2022-04-19 11:45:34 |
2 format correct
Vivi Li
 -1 word(s) 1431 2022-04-20 05:49:37 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Tsalidis, G.A.; , . Fungicides Elimination in Agriculture. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21936 (accessed on 08 May 2024).
Tsalidis GA,  . Fungicides Elimination in Agriculture. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21936. Accessed May 08, 2024.
Tsalidis, Georgios Archimidis, . "Fungicides Elimination in Agriculture" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21936 (accessed May 08, 2024).
Tsalidis, G.A., & , . (2022, April 19). Fungicides Elimination in Agriculture. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21936
Tsalidis, Georgios Archimidis and . "Fungicides Elimination in Agriculture." Encyclopedia. Web. 19 April, 2022.
Fungicides Elimination in Agriculture
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su14020846

Fungicides is a class of pesticides that target fungi that is commonly used in conventional farming. The benefits of pesticides are the consequences of their effects: increased productivity, protection of crop losses, vector disease control, and quality of food. Europe’s Farm to Fork strategy aims to boost the development of its organic farming area to 25% of total farmland by 2030. The environmental impacts of fungicides due to their production and application are analyzed, and expected benefits to human health and ecosystem quality due to their elimination are calculated here.

conventional agriculture azoxystrobin mancozeb disability adjusted life year time-integrated species loss toxicity vegetables fruit cereals organic agriculture

1. Introduction

The most environmentally damaging form of human consumption is eating [1] because industrial agriculture results in environmental burdens due to the overuse of machinery, fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides [2]. The latter are toxic to humans and the environment [3]. This entry reviews the contribution to toxicity of fungicides in fruits, vegetables, cereals, and rapeseed production to show the benefits for human health and ecosystem quality after their elimination.
The primary goals of agriculture are the production of nutritional food for humans and feed for animals, and the increased economic development of stakeholders. In addition, the UN 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development also identified bioeconomy as being in line with goals for energy efficiency (Goal 7) [4]. These goals resulted in a significant growth of the bioeconomy, and the number of publications about bioeconomy increased from 1000 in 2017 to approximately 3500 in 2021 [5]. Furthermore, during the period 2021 to 2030, global agricultural production is projected to increase by 1.4% per year [6]. Maize, rice, wheat, oilseeds, and oil products are major commodities globally [6]. Due to the introduction of synthetic pesticides between 1960 and 1989, pest control and agricultural output have significantly improved [7].
Intensive, industrial agricultural practices employ large quantities of inputs, such as fuels, electricity, water for irrigation, fertilizers, and pesticides. Such intensive agricultural practices are held responsible for increased energy use and accompanied elevated emissions of greenhouse gases [8], and adverse effects on human health and ecosystem quality [3]. In contrast, in organic agricultural practice, the use of fertilizers is significantly reduced while the consumption of pesticides is avoided [9].
The term pesticide covers a wide range of compounds, including insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, etc. The benefits of pesticides are the consequences of their effects: increased productivity, protection of crop losses, vector disease control, and quality of food [7]. These effects occur due to active ingredients in pesticides, which are chemicals that kill, control, or repel pests. The World Health Organization [10] and a study [11] focusing on toxicity stated that insecticides tend to be more toxic to humans than fungicides and herbicides by one and four orders of magnitude, respectively. However, three active fungicides ingredients—(1) tebuconazole, (2) epoxiconazole, and (3) prochloraz—were more toxic than herbicides and insecticides to mitochondrial activities, membrane degradations, and caspases 3/7 activities [12].
Fungicides are the class of pesticides that target fungi. Fungicides are classified as systemic and contact. Systemic fungicide can be defined as a fungicide that, when sprayed on top surfaces of the plant, is translocated to the plant tissues, transferring its toxicity to the targeted fungus [13]. Examples of systemic fungicides are Benomyl, Crypoconazol, and Imazalil. Contact fungicides remain on the plant surface after application and do not penetrate plant tissues. These fungicides are typically employed to control foliar diseases. A contact fungicide must be present on the plant surface before the disease penetrates the tissue [14]. Examples of contact fungicides are Mancozeb and Thiram. Pre-harvest fungicide use is greatly limited or absent in organic agroecosystems [15]. According to studies [16][17][18], approximately 55% of applied fungicide is found in air, freshwater, and soil while the rest remains in or on the crop, depending on fungicide class.
Stakeholders from corporate, academic, civil society, and governmental sectors highlighted a shift to organic agriculture as a sustainable solution to the negative effects of industrial agriculture [19]. In particular, European Union (EU) strategies regarding agricultural development encourage eco-friendly practices [20]. Europe’s Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy aims to boost the development of its organic farming area to 25% of total farmland by 2030. However, a recent study [21] concluded that increasing organic cultivation with the F2F strategy may result in less sustainable food systems because EU law strictly prohibits the use of genetically modified organisms in organic cultivation, which can result in failing to achieve hunger reduction (Sustainable Development Goal 2).

2. Fungicides Contribution to Environmental Impacts

Active ingredients of fungicides contribute to various environmental impacts depending on their constituents and release in terms of mass, and release in terms of environmental medium. Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the extent to which active ingredients contribute to climate change, freshwater ecotoxicity, terrestrial ecotoxicity, human toxicity [3], (terrestrial) acidification [22], and freshwater eutrophication [23]. Among these environmental impacts, only climate change is not affected during fungicide application but derives from the production their stage due to greenhouse gases emissions. The other impacts occur during fungicides application in the cultivation stage.
Figure 1. Box plot with median and outliers of fungicides contribution to environmental impacts of 1 kg of fruits.
Figure 2. Box plot with median and outliers of fungicides contribution to environmental impacts of 1 kg of vegetables.
Figure 3. Box plot with median and outliers of fungicides contribution to environmental impacts of 1 kg of cereals and seeds.

3. Endpoint Impacts Due to Fungicides Application

In 2019, approximately 42,000, 55,430, and 255,870 ktonnes of fruits, vegetables [24], and cereals [25], respectively, were produced in Europe with conventional farming [26][27]. It should be mentioned that non-edible parts of these agricultural products and rapeseed can be used for the production of biofuels [28][29] depending on the availability of money and consumers’ habits [30]. Table 1 and Table 2 show minimum and maximum benefits in human health per person and ecosystems quality (terrestrial), respectively, if fungicides are eliminated in fruits, vegetables, and cereals and rapeseed production in Europe. Outliers of climate change (in Figure 1 and Figure 2) were not considered in endpoint calculations based on Grubbs’ test. These outliers were derived from studies that grouped fungicides emissions with farm emissions.
Table 1. Human health and ecosystem quality (terrestrial) based on low contribution of fungicides to climate change, human toxicity, terrestrial ecotoxicity, and terrestrial acidification.
  Disability Adjusted Life Years per Person (y·p−1) Time Integrated Species Loss
(Species·yr)
  Climate Change Human Toxicity Climate Change Terrestrial Ecotoxicity Terrestrial
Acidification
Individualist perspective
Fruits 4.4 × 10−7 1.8 × 10−6 0 0 0
Vegetables 4.6 × 10−7 2.5 × 10−7 0 7.7 × 10−1 0
Cereals and rapeseed 1.8 × 10−7 1.3 × 10−5 0 6.2 × 10−1 7.1
Hierarchical perspective
Fruits 0 1.8 × 10−6 0 0 0
Vegetables 0 2.5 × 10−7 0 7.7 × 10−1 0
Cereals and rapeseed 0 1.3 × 10−5 0 6.2 × 10−1 7.1
Egalitarian perspective
Fruits 0 1.8 × 10−6 0 0 0
Vegetables 0 2.5 × 10−7 0 7.7 × 10−1 0
Cereals and rapeseed 0 1.3 × 10−5 0 6.2 × 10−1 7.1
Table 2. Human health and ecosystem quality (terrestrial) based on high contribution of fungicides to climate change, human toxicity, terrestrial ecotoxicity, and terrestrial acidification.
  Disability Adjusted Life Years per Person (y·p−1) Time Integrated Species Loss
(Species·yr)
  Climate Change Human Toxicity Climate Change Terrestrial
Ecotoxicity		 Terrestrial
Acidification
Individualist perspective
Fruits 4.4 × 10−7 1.8 × 10−5 1.5 18.4 1.8
Vegetables 4.6 × 10−7 2.7 × 10−6 1.6 7.7 5.8
Cereals and rapeseed 1.8 × 10−7 5.3 × 10−6 0.6 3.1 56.5
Hierarchical perspective
Fruits 5.0 × 10−6 1.8 × 10−5 7.7 18.4 1.8
Vegetables 5.3 × 10−6 2.7× 10−6 8.2 7.7 5.8
Cereals and rapeseed 2.0 × 10−6 5.3× 10−6 3.1 3.1 56.5
Egalitarian perspective
Fruits 7.0 × 10−5 1.8 × 10−5 69.0 18.4 1.8
Vegetables 7.4 × 10−5 2.7 × 10−6 73.1 7.7 5.8
Cereals and rapeseed 2.8 × 10−5 5.3 × 10−6 28.1 3.1 56.5
Potential benefits for human health are greater in fruits than vegetables, cereals, and rapeseed. In addition, the fact that midpoint to endpoint conversion factors ranges minimally between individualist and hierarchist perspectives results in similar values for both perspectives for both low and high fungicides contributions to climate change and human toxicity. In contrast, concerning the egalitarian perspective, the climate change midpoint to endpoint conversion factor increases by at least one order of magnitude compared to the individualist perspective and results in adverse effects for all crops (Table 2). This increase in climate change conversion factor results in vegetables damaging human health more than cereals and rapeseed with the egalitarian perspective. Human toxicity is the midpoint indicator that influences human health results for all perspectives. Climate change insignificantly affects human health from individualist and hierarchist perspectives but increases its effect with the egalitarian perspective due to the increase in midpoint to endpoint contribution. Lastly, the production of cereals is an order of magnitude higher than fruits and vegetables, but the very low contribution of fungicides in human toxicity of cereals and rapeseed does not result in higher toxicity per person than fruits.
The elimination of fungicides in cereals and rapeseed results in greater potential benefits in ecosystem quality (terrestrial) than vegetables and fruits for individualist and hierarchist perspectives. This occurs mainly due to production yields of cereals and rapeseed and larger terrestrial acidification score of cereals and rapeseed than other crops, especially with respect to the lowest amount of expected ecosystem benefits (Table 1). In contrast, terrestrial ecotoxicity is the largest contributor to benefits in ecosystem quality for the cases of fruits and vegetables based on the individualist and hierarchist perspectives. The individualist and hierarchist perspectives result in a greater difference in benefits among considered crops, but similar benefits are found with the egalitarian perspective. The egalitarian perspective results in more species loss due to the increase in midpoint to endpoint conversion factor for climate change and production yields for all crops.

References

  1. Ehrlich, P.R. A personal view: Environmental education—Its content and delivery. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 2011, 1, 6–13.
  2. Muñoz, P.; Antón, A.; Núñez, M.; Paranjpe, A.; Ariño, J.; Castells, X.; Montero, J.; Rieradevall, J. Comparing The Environmental Impacts Of Greenhouse Versus Open-Field Tomato Production In The Mediterranean Region. Acta Hortic. 2008, 801, 1591–1596.
  3. Winans, K.; Brodt, S.; Kendall, A. Life cycle assessment of California processing tomato: An evaluation of the effects of evolving practices and technologies over a 10-year (2005–2015) timeframe. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2019, 25, 538–547.
  4. D’Amico, G.; Szopik-Depczyńska, K.; Beltramo, R.; D’Adamo, I.; Ioppolo, G. Smart and Sustainable Bioeconomy Platform: A New Approach towards Sustainability. Sustainability 2022, 14, 466.
  5. D’Adamo, I.; Gastaldi, M.; Morone, P.; Rosa, P.; Sassanelli, C.; Settembre-Blundo, D.; Shen, Y. Bioeconomy of Sustainability: Drivers, Opportunities and Policy Implications. Sustainability 2021, 14, 200.
  6. OECD. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2021–2030; OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook; OECD: Paris, France, 2021; ISBN 978-92-64-43607-7.
  7. Aktar, W.; Sengupta, D.; Chowdhury, A. Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: Their benefits and hazards. Interdiscip. Toxicol. 2009, 2, 1–12.
  8. Mazis, A.; Litskas, V.D.; Platis, D.P.; Menexes, G.C.; Anagnostopoulos, C.D.; Tsaboula, A.D.; Mamolos, A.P.; Kalburtji, K.L. Could energy equilibrium and greenhouse gas emissions in agroecosystems play a key role in crop replacement? A case study in orange and kiwi orchards. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 29421–29431.
  9. Esteve-Turrillas, F.; de la Guardia, M. Environmental impact of Recover cotton in textile industry. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 116, 107–115.
  10. World Health Organization Pesticide Residues in Food. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/pesticide-residues-in-food (accessed on 18 December 2021).
  11. Juraske, R.; Sanjuán, N. Life cycle toxicity assessment of pesticides used in integrated and organic production of oranges in the Comunidad Valenciana, Spain. Chemosphere 2011, 82, 956–962.
  12. Mesnage, R.; Defarge, N.; De Vendômois, J.S.; Séralini, G.-E. Major Pesticides Are More Toxic to Human Cells Than Their Declared Active Principles. BioMed Res. Int. 2014, 2014, 179691.
  13. Moharram, A.M.; Abdel-Hafez, S.I.I.; El-Said, A.H.M.; Salee, A. Effect of Two Systemic Fungicides on Cellulose Decomposing Fungi of Tomato Plants and on Some Enzymatic Activities. Acta Microbiol. Immunol. Hung. 2004, 51, 403–430.
  14. Sari, A.L.; Lubis, L. The effectiveness of contact fungicides mancozeb in controlling potato leaf blight disease (Phytophthora infestans (Mont) de Barry) in Karo District in the wet month and in the laboratory. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2021; Volume 782.
  15. Benbrook, C.; Kegley, S.; Baker, B. Organic Farming Lessens Reliance on Pesticides and Promotes Public Health by Lowering Dietary Risks. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1266.
  16. Gentil-Sergent, C.; Basset-Mens, C.; Renaud-Gentié, C.; Mottes, C.; Melero, C.; Launay, A.; Fantke, P. Introducing ground cover management in pesticide emission modeling. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 2021, 18, 274–288.
  17. van Calker, K.J.; Berentsen, P.B.M.; De Boer, I.M.J.; Giesen, G.W.J.; Huirne, R.B.M. An LP-model to analyse economic and ecological sustainability on Dutch dairy farms: Model presentation and application for experimental farm “de Marke”. Agric. Syst. 2004, 82, 139–160.
  18. Wang, F.; Liu, Y.; Ouyang, X.; Hao, J.; Yang, X. Comparative environmental impact assessments of green food certified cucumber and conventional cucumber cultivation in China. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2018, 33, 432–442.
  19. He, X.; Qiao, Y.; Liu, Y.; Dendler, L.; Yin, C.; Martin, F. Environmental impact assessment of organic and conventional tomato production in urban greenhouses of Beijing city, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134, 251–258.
  20. Casolani, N.; Nissi, E.; Giampaolo, A.; Liberatore, L. Evaluating the effects of European support measures for Italian organic farms. Land Use Policy 2021, 102, 105225.
  21. Purnhagen, K.P.; Clemens, S.; Eriksson, D.; Fresco, L.O.; Tosun, J.; Qaim, M.; Visser, R.G.; Weber, A.P.; Wesseler, J.H.; Zilberman, D. Europe’s Farm to Fork Strategy and Its Commitment to Biotechnology and Organic Farming: Conflicting or Complementary Goals? Trends Plant Sci. 2021, 26, 600–606.
  22. Roy, P.-O.; Azevedo, L.B.; Margni, M.; van Zelm, R.; Deschênes, L.; Huijbregts, M.A.J. Characterization Factors for Terrestrial Acidification at the Global Scale: A Systematic Analysis of Spatial Variability and Uncertainty. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 500–501, 270–276.
  23. Lu, T.; Zhang, Q.; Lavoie, M.; Zhu, Y.; Ye, Y.; Yang, J.; Paerl, H.W.; Qian, H.; Zhu, Y.-G. The Fungicide Azoxystrobin Promotes Freshwater Cyanobacterial Dominance through Altering Competition. Microbiome 2019, 7, 128.
  24. Messe Berlin GmbH. Fruitnet Fruit Logistica. In European Statistics Handbook; Messe Berlin GmbH: Berlin, Germany, 2021.
  25. Eurostat Agricultural Production—Crops. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Agricultural_production_-_crops (accessed on 17 December 2021).
  26. Röös, E.; Mie, A.; Wivstad, M.; Salomon, E.; Johansson, B.; Gunnarsson, S.; Wallenbeck, A.; Hoffmann, R.; Nilsson, U.; Sundberg, C.; et al. Risks and Opportunities of Increasing Yields in Organic Farming: A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 38, 14.
  27. Trávníček, J.; Schaack, D.; Willer, H. Organic Agriculture in Europe: Current Statistics; 2021. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwisloXJ6qv1AhWCy6QKHT9lD7cQFnoECBYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Forgprints.org%2F39367%2F1%2Ftravnicek-etal-2021-02-18-2pm-european-market-final.pdf&usg=AOvVaw00LPk_mELOPe2K_2eMZ5tA (accessed on 17 December 2021).
  28. Ikram, M.; Sroufe, R.; Awan, U.; Abid, N. Enabling Progress in Developing Economies: A Novel Hybrid Decision-Making Model for Green Technology Planning. Sustainability 2022, 14, 258.
  29. Ding, Z.; Grundmann, P. Development of Biorefineries in the Bioeconomy: A Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis among European Countries. Sustainability 2022, 14, 90.
  30. Bekti, D.B.M.; Prasetyo, Y.T.; Redi, A.A.N.P.; Budiman, A.S.; Mandala, I.M.P.L.; Putra, A.R.; Persada, S.F.; Nadlifatin, R.; Young, M.N. Determining Factors Affecting Customer Intention to Use Rooftop Solar Photovoltaics in Indonesia. Sustainability 2022, 14, 280.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Environmental Sciences
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Georgios Archimidis Tsalidis
,
View Times: 457
Entry Collection: Environmental Sciences
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 20 Apr 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Feedback