Effects of co-formulants on the absorption and secretion of active substances in plant protection products in vitro

Pesticides impacts on human health and the environment with their mechanisms of action and possible countermeasures

Pesticides are chemical constituents used to prevent or control pests, including insects, rodents, fungi, weeds, and other unwanted organisms. Despite their advantages in crop production and disease management, the use of pesticides poses significant hazards to the environment and public health. Pesticide elements have now perpetually entered our atmosphere and subsequently contaminated water, food, and soil, leading to health threats ranging from acute to chronic toxicities. Pesticides can cause acute toxicity if a high dose is inhaled, ingested, or comes into contact with the skin or eyes, while prolonged or recurrent exposure to pesticides leads to chronic toxicity. Pesticides produce different types of toxicity, for instance, neurotoxicity, mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, and endocrine disruption. The toxicity of a pesticide formulation may depend on the specific active ingredient and the presence of synergistic or inert compounds that can enhance or modify its toxicity. Safety concerns are the need of the hour to control contemporary pesticide-induced health hazards. The effectiveness and implementation of the current legislature in providing ample protection for human health and the environment are key concerns. This review explored a comprehensive summary of pesticides regarding their updated impacts on human health and advanced safety concerns with legislation. Implementing regulations, proper training, and education can help mitigate the negative impacts of pesticide use and promote safer and more sustainable agricultural practices.

Suspect screening of pesticide co-formulants in fruits, vegetables and leaves by liquid and gas chromatography coupled to high resolution mass accuracy spectrometry: Potential impact on human health

Vegetables can contain co-formulants derived from the use of plant protection products (PPPs) in crops. Thus, in the current study co-formulants were determined in different fruits and vegetables and their leaves by gas and liquid chromatography coupled to Q-Orbitrap high-resolution mass spectrometry (GC-Q-Orbitrap and LC-Q-Orbitrap-MS). A total of 37 co-formulants were tentatively identified, and among them, 12 compounds were quantified by LC-Q-Orbitrap-MS and 9 by GC-Q-Orbitrap-MS. The mean co-formulant levels in fruit and vegetable samples was 92% lower than in leaf samples. Selected samples showed a high concentration of 1-ethyl-2-pyrrolidone among the co-formulants detected. This compound ranged from 22 µg/kg (strawberry) to 722 µg/kg (red grape), whereas in the case of leaves, its concentration was up to 6513 µg/kg in cucumber leaf. In addition, it has an LD50 equal to 1.440 g/kg. Therefore, this type of PPP co-formulants should be controlled in fruits and vegetables to avoid adverse health effects.

Basic concepts of mixture toxicity and relevance for risk evaluation and regulation

Exposure to multiple substances is a challenge for risk evaluation. Currently, there is an ongoing debate if generic "mixture assessment/allocation factors" (MAF) should be introduced to increase public health protection. Here, we explore concepts of mixture toxicity and the potential influence of mixture regulation concepts for human health protection. Based on this analysis, we provide recommendations for research and risk assessment. One of the concepts of mixture toxicity is additivity. Substances may act additively by affecting the same molecular mechanism within a common target cell, for example, dioxin-like substances. In a second concept, an "enhancer substance" may act by increasing the target site concentration and aggravating the adverse effect of a "driver substance". For both concepts, adequate risk management of individual substances can reliably prevent adverse effects to humans. Furthermore, we discuss the hypothesis that the large number of substances to which humans are exposed at very low and individually safe doses may interact to cause adverse effects. This commentary identifies knowledge gaps, such as the lack of a comprehensive overview of substances regulated under different silos, including food, environmentally and occupationally relevant substances, the absence of reliable human exposure data and the missing accessibility of ratios of current human exposure to threshold values, which are considered safe for individual substances. Moreover, a comprehensive overview of the molecular mechanisms and most susceptible target cells is required. We conclude that, currently, there is no scientific evidence supporting the need for a generic MAF. Rather, we recommend taking more specific measures, which focus on compounds with relatively small ratios between human exposure and doses, at which adverse effects can be expected.

Unveiling Coformulants in Plant Protection Products by LC-HRMS Using a Polyhydroxy Methacrylate Stationary Phase

A polyhydroxy methacrylate-based stationary reversed phase was used for the determination of coformulants in 20 plant protection products (PPPs). These samples were analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to Q-Orbitrap high-resolution mass spectrometry (LC-Q-Orbitrap-HRMS) in full-scan MS and data-dependent acquisition (ddMS2) modes. A total of 92 coformulants were tentatively identified in these formulations by nontargeted and unknown analyses. Twelve out of them were quantified by analytical standards. The most concentrated coformulant was the anionic surfactant dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid, whose highest content was obtained in the Score 25 sample (6.87%, w/v). Furthermore, triethylene glycol monomethyl ether, 4-s-butyl-2,6-di-tert-butylphenol, 1-ethyl-2-pyrrolidone, sorbitan monostearate, 2,6-dimethylaniline, palmitamide, and N-lauryldiethanolamine were quantified for the first time in these products. Hence, the polyhydroxy methacrylate-based stationary phase increased the identification of new coformulants in PPPs, being complementary to conventional C18. This strategy could be applied in future studies to estimate potential coformulant residues from PPPs applied to crops.

Enzyme Inhibition-Based Assay to Estimate the Contribution of Formulants to the Effect of Commercial Pesticide Formulations

Pesticides can affect the health of individual organisms and the function of the entire ecosystem. Therefore, thorough assessment of the risks associated with the use of pesticides is a high-priority task. An enzyme inhibition-based assay is used in this study as a convenient and quick tool to study the effects of pesticides at the molecular level. The contribution of formulants to toxicological properties of the pesticide formulations has been studied by analyzing effects of 7 active ingredients of pesticides (AIas) and 10 commercial formulations based on them (AIfs) on the function of a wide range of enzyme assay systems differing in complexity (single-, coupled, and three-enzyme assay systems). Results have been compared with the effects of AIas and AIfs on bioluminescence of the luminous bacterium Photobacterium phosphoreum. Mostly, AIfs produce a considerably stronger inhibitory effect on the activity of enzyme assay systems and bioluminescence of the luminous bacterium than AIas, which confirms the contribution of formulants to toxicological properties of the pesticide formulation. Results of the current study demonstrate that "inert" ingredients are not ecotoxicologically safe and can considerably augment the inhibitory effect of pesticide formulations; therefore, their use should be controlled more strictly. Circular dichroism and fluorescence spectra of the enzymes used for assays do not show any changes in the protein structure in the presence of commercial pesticide formulations during the assay procedure. This finding suggests that pesticides produce the inhibitory effect on enzymes through other mechanisms.

Mixture effects of co-formulants and two plant protection products in a liver cell line

Plant protection products (PPPs) consist of one or more active substances and several co-formulants. Active substances provide the functionality of the PPP and are consequently evaluated according to standard test methods set by legal data requirements before approval, whereas co-formulants' toxicity is not as comprehensively assessed. However, in some cases mixture effects of active substances and co-formulants might result in increased or different forms of toxicity. In a proof-of-concept study we hence built on previously published results of Zahn et al. (2018[38]) on the mixture toxicity of Priori Xtra^® and Adexar^® to specifically investigate the influence of co-formulants on the toxicity of these commonly used fungicides. Products, their respective active substances in combination as well as some co-formulants were applied to human hepatoma cell line (HepaRG) in several dilutions. Cell viability analysis, mRNA expression, abundance of xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes and intracellular concentrations of active substances determined by LC-MS/MS analyses demonstrated that the toxicity of the PPPs is influenced by the presence of co-formulants in vitro. PPPs were more cytotoxic than the mix of their active substances. Gene expression profiles of cells treated with the PPPs were similar to those treated with their respective mixture combinations with marked differences. Co-formulants can cause gene expression changes on their own. LC-MS/MS analyses revealed higher intracellular concentrations of active substances in cells treated with PPPs compared to those treated with the respective active substances' mix. Proteomic data showed co-formulants can induce ABC transporters and CYP enzymes. Co-formulants can contribute to the observed increased toxicity of PPPs compared to their active substances in combination due to kinetic interactions, necessitating a more comprehensive evaluation approach.

Recommended rates of azoxystrobin and tebuconazole seem to be environmentally safe but ineffective against target fungi

The use of fungicides in agriculture has been playing a role in the enhancement of agricultural yields through the control of pathogens causing serious diseases in crops. Still, adverse environmental and human health effects resulting from its application have been reported. In this study, the possibility of readjusting the formulation of a commercial product combining azoxystrobin and tebuconazole (active ingredients - AIs; Custodia®) towards environmentally safer alternative(s) was investigated. Specifically, the sensitivity of non-target aquatic communities to each AI was first evaluated by applying the Species Sensitivity Distributions (SSDs) approach. Then, mixtures of these AIs were tested in a non-target organism (Raphidocelis subcapitata) denoting sensitivity to both AIs as assessed from SSDs. The resulting data supported the design of the last stage of this study, where mixtures of those AIs at equivalent vs. alternative ratios and rates as in the commercial formulation were tested against two target fungal species: Pyrenophora teres CBS 123929 and Rhynchosporium secalis CBS 110524. The comparison between the sensitivity of non-target aquatic species and the corresponding efficacy towards target fungi revealed that currently applied mixture and rates of these AIs are generally environmentally safe (antagonistic interaction; concentrations below the EC₁ for R. subcapitata and generally below the HC₅ for aquatic non-target communities), but ineffective against target organisms (maximum levels of inhibition of 70 and 50% in P. teres CBS 123929 and R. secalis CBS 110524, respectively). Results additionally suggest a potentiation of the effects of the AIs by the other formulants added to the commercial product at tested rates. Overall, this study corroborates that commercial products can be optimized during design stages based on a systematic ecotoxicological testing for ingredient interactions and actual efficacy against targets. This could be a valuable pathway to reduce environmental contamination during transition to a more sustainable agricultural production.

Characterization of the composition of plant protection products in different formulation types employing suspect screening and unknown approaches

BACKGROUND

Plant protection products (PPPs) are used extensively in agriculture to control crops. These PPPs, which may be found in different types of formulations, are composed of a designated pesticide (active principle) and other inactive ingredients as co-formulants. They perform specific functions in the formulation, as solvents, preservatives or antifreeze agents, among others.

RESULTS

A research technique based on ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC) coupled to a Quadrupole-Orbitrap mass analyzer was successfully applied to characterize the composition of six different PPPs in terms of the presence of co-formulants and types of formulations: emulsifiable concentrate (EC), emulsion in water (EW), suspension concentrate and water-dispersible granule. These PPPs (FLINT MAX, MASSOCUR 12.5 EC, IMPACT EVO, TOPAS, LATINO and IMPALA STAR) had antifungal activity, containing one triazole compound as active principle (tebuconazole, penconazole, myclobutanil, flutriafol or fenbuconazole, respectively). Non-targeted approaches, applying suspect and unknown analysis, were carried out and ten compounds were identified as potential co-formulants. Six (glyceryl monostearate, 1-monopalmitin, dimethyl sulfoxide, N,N-dimethyldecanamide, hexaethylene glycol and 1,2-benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one) were confirmed by injecting analytical standards. Finally, these compounds were quantified in the PPPs.

CONCLUSION

The current study allowed for detecting co-formulants in a wide range of concentrations, between 0.04 (dimethyl sulfoxide) and 19.00 g L^-1 (glyceryl monostearate), highlighting the feasibility of the proposed analytical methodology. Moreover, notable differences among the types of formulations of PPPs were achieved, revealing that EC and EW were the formulations that contained the largest number of co-formulants (four out of six detected compounds). © 2022 The Authors. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

A comparative in silico study to detect the effect of food-additives on metabolic protein and its perturbations compensated by osmolytes

Since its inception, food additive has been an integral part of the food processing industry with various commercial roles. Besides its advantages, various studies have already highlighted its long-term adverse effects on human health. However, in terms of protein structures and functions, the innate mechanism that triggers these effects has not been elucidated in previously reported studies. Our work takes an in silico approach to delve into structural implications resulting from these additives with three well studied metabolic proteins-lysozyme, bovine serum albumin (BSA) and ribonuclease A. Three classes of food additives- synthetic color, preservatives, and phosphate-containing, are taken here to understand their effects on the aforementioned metabolic proteins. Conventional molecular docking and dynamics (MD) studies reveal that these additives induce significant structural perturbations. Among them, carmoisine brings about the most secondary structural changes for lysozyme and ribonuclease A, whereas sodium tripolyphosphate affects BSA the most. To restore the secondary structural loss, we further examine the roles of osmolytes through cross-docking and higher timescale MD simulations. These studies unravel that application of osmolytes like raffinose and trehalose triggers structural restoration for BSA, lysozyme and ribonuclease A, and highlight their roles as co-formulants to alleviate the adverse effects of food additives.

Assessment of Co-Formulants in Marketed Plant Protection Products by LC-Q-Orbitrap-MS: Application of a Hybrid Data Treatment Strategy Combining Suspect Screening and Unknown Analysis

The aim of this study was the determination of co-formulants in 15 different chlorantraniliprole- and difenoconazole-based plant protection products (PPPs) belonging to different formulations. Samples were analyzed by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography coupled to Q-Orbitrap high-resolution mass accuracy spectrometry (UHPLC-Q-Orbitrap-MS), operating in full-scan MS and data-dependent acquisition (ddMS²) modes. A total of 78 co-formulants were tentatively identified by a combination of suspect screening and unknown analysis. Nine of them were later confirmed by analytical standards. Finally, the analytical method was successfully validated and co-formulants were quantified. Linear alkyl ethoxylates (LAS) were the most common type of co-formulant, followed by sodium alkylbenzene sulfonates. Moreover, sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate had the highest concentration of any co-formulant (up to 32.33 g/L). In all, an innovative identification of co-formulants in a large number of PPPs is presented, which will give room for future studies delving into the composition of PPPs or determining these co-formulants in environmental or agricultural samples.